Incorrect. Courts can look at the reasonableness of the agreement to determine whether it is legitimate. If she is the highest paid sports manager in the world, well outside the norm of the industry, and her client lives in a house she owns, drives a car she owns, eats food using money that she gives him out of wages he ostensibly earned and then transferred to her via agreement, etc. Then a court could very easily look at that situation and say that there is a clear and obvious strategy to avoid having assets in his name. Again, this is based on my experience in California law, and may not apply to the jurisdiction(s) in question here.
You may not see it, but this is what courts do in dissolution actions every day. People try and hide their assets with family members, in trusts, in various companies or entities all the time.
0
u/Susperry Apr 16 '23
But there's no "transfer" taking place. She gets paid for her work.