JJ, Dina D’Malchusa is not all encompassing and it is inapplicable regarding many things. If the Shulchan Aruch says one thing but secular law says to do it another way on whenever subject (monetary, etc.), we follow Halacha/Shulchan Aruch and not non-Jewish laws.
Ash, you’re completely wrong. Besides, what “transaction”? The marital assets aren’t from some transaction between the husband and wife. The Halacha clearly states that any money or assets a wife comes into possession of during the course of her marriage is the full property of the husband.
Regarding yerusha, if it was a a matono mchayim then it isn’t a yerusha.
TLIK, where have I ever commented on this thread regarding particular offenses of any Beis Din or, for that matter, systematic problems of such? I haven’t; my comments have been general about Halacha that butei dinim are mandated to operate under. That being said, as a rule of thumb (that deviates in instances both ways) is that left-wing/modern beit dins are more often problematic with deviating from Halacha in favor of non-Jewish laws whereas right-wing/chareidi butei dinim are much less likely to do so.
And, yes, in things such as business transactions Halacha itself states that local customs are taken into account governing the legal effects and ramifications of such transactions. And local customs often include recognizing local secular law. Halacha specifically tells us to take that into account. But Halacha also tells us we cannot take into consideration local non-Jewish law governing personal relations and activities (including monetary) between fellow Jews. Especially so when Halacha specifically and directly provides laws governing such interactions and monetary issues that differ from what the local secular laws govern for such disputes.