Category: Divorce

It is that time again when we are supposed to resolve to take steps to make our lives better in the year ahead.

And if you are in the middle of, or about to start, divorce proceedings then there are certainly some steps that you can take to make things better, or at least less difficult.

1. Always put the children first

The first, and most important, of these resolutions.

If you have dependent children then it is essential that you put their welfare first in everything you do in connection with the divorce. The divorce will be traumatic enough for them, without you making things worse.

Obviously, the welfare of the children must be foremost in sorting out arrangements about where they will live and, if with one parent, what contact the other parent will have (always think about what is best for them, not what you want).

But it also applies to sorting out finances and property on divorce, where arrangements must be tailored to the needs of the children.

And remember that whatever has to be sorted out, bitter arguments between their parents will have serious adverse effects upon the children.

2. Look to the future, not the past

Divorce obviously often follows distressing events within the marriage, and it can be all too easy to get bogged down with efforts to make your spouse pay for what they have done in the past.

But there is nothing that can be done to change the past, and in most cases the court is unlikely to be interested in the reasons for the breakdown of the marriage.

Sorting out a divorce is not about seeking redress for past events, but about making arrangements for the future. You should therefore concentrate on the future, not on the past.

3. Don’t try to hide assets

Often, one party to the marriage will have significantly more financial assets than the other. They may be tempted to try to hide those assets, to prevent the other party receiving any of them in the divorce settlement.

But such action is likely to fail, and needless to say the court will take a very dim view of it.

The party hiding assets could end up with a worse settlement, and could even be penalised by being ordered to contribute towards the other party’s legal costs.

4. Make every reasonable effort to agree matters

This should go without saying.

If you can’t agree matters, including arrangements for children and finances, then you will have to ask the court to sort them out for you.

But court proceedings take a lot of time, are expensive, and can be extremely stressful. They should be avoided at all costs.

You should therefore make every reasonable effort to agree matters, if necessary using out of court dispute resolution, such as mediation.

5. Do what the court says

If you do find yourself in contested court proceedings, the court will require you to do certain things, for example make full disclosure of your means in financial remedy proceedings.

You may not want to comply with the court’s orders, but it is essential that you do so. Failure to comply will very likely result in you being ordered to pay the other party’s costs.

6. Take legal advice

We all know that legal advice costs money, but trying to save money by not taking advice is likely to be a false economy.

Without taking advice you could end up missing out on your entitlement, for example in relation to pensions.

You could also ensure that any proposed settlement is reasonable.

And good advice can save time and stress by ensuring that you do not pursue unreasonable expectations.

7. Follow your lawyer’s advice!

A lawyer will not always give their client the advice that the client wants to hear. Obviously there are times when a case will not go as the client wants, and a good lawyer must advise the client accordingly.

And a client receiving unwanted advice may be tempted to ignore it.

By all means seek a second opinion, but ignoring advice is likely to end in disaster. You must understand that a lawyer’s advice is given in the best interests of the client, whether the client wishes to hear it or not.

*          *          *

When you come to Family Law Cafe we work for you to get you the best outcome, giving you choices and keeping you informed and in control 24/7 using our secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: fizkes / Shutterstock.com

Same-sex divorce is on the rise, and it is likely to continue rising.

This is not unexpected. Same-sex divorce has only been possible since 2015, and the number of same-sex divorces is therefore unlikely to reach a settled peak for some time.

To give an idea, there were some 1,500 same-sex divorces in 2021, the most recent year for which figures are available. But if the divorce rate amongst same-sex couples is going to match that amongst opposite-sex couples (about 40%), then we can expect the number of same-sex divorces to increase significantly (there are about 7,000 same-sex marriages each year).

OK, so an increasing number of people are going to be going through a same-sex divorce. What do they need to know about how to go about it, and how things may differ compared to an opposite-sex divorce?

The simple answer is that things should be very similar for same-sex and opposite-sex divorces. But there are a couple of issues that could arise for same-sex divorces.

The procedure to obtain a same-sex divorce is exactly the same as for an opposite-sex divorce. One or both parties will need to file with the court a statement that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, and after 20 weeks have elapsed they can apply for the conditional divorce order. Six weeks after that, they can apply for the final divorce order.

But a divorce is not usually just about dissolving the marriage. Arrangements for children and finances may also have to be sorted out.

Again, the way these things are sorted out should be similar for same-sex and opposite-sex divorces.

However, there could be two particular issues.

Firstly, the same-sex couple may have had a child via a surrogacy arrangement, so that only one of them is a biological parent of the child, and this could lead to complications when the other party to the marriage seeks to have contact with the child after the separation.

This should not be an issue if the other party has obtained a parental order giving them full legal parenthood and parental responsibility, but there could be complications if the marriage breaks down before they have obtained a parental order.

The second issue relates to finances.

Same-sex marriage has only been possible in England and Wales since 2014 (12 months must have elapsed since the marriage before a divorce can take place, hence same-sex divorce has only been possible since 2015), and a lot of same-sex relationships were therefore in existence long before the parties married.

But the length of the marriage is a factor that can have a bearing upon a divorce settlement, so that a party may expect a less favourable settlement if it has been a shorter marriage.

This will not normally be a problem, as the court will usually count pre-marriage cohabitation towards the length of the marriage. However, it can be difficult to prove when cohabitation began, and this can lead to arguments in court.

If either of these issues apply to you then you should seek expert legal advice. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

When you come to Family Law Cafe we work for you to get you the best outcome, giving you choices and keeping you informed and in control 24/7 using our secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Phovoir / Shutterstock.com

It goes without saying that divorce can be prohibitively expensive. It is therefore no surprise that most people going through divorce will be looking for ways to minimise that expense.

And that has given rise to a growing market of unregulated cut-price online providers of ‘quickie’ divorce services.

Unfortunately, consumer experiences of these services are not always what they should be.

It is therefore welcome that the Competition and Markets Authority (‘CMA’), the UK competition regulator, has launched a new investigation into online divorce services, as well as unregulated will-writing and pre-paid probate services.

The investigation follows complaints to the CMA about the services, including misleading claims about both the simplicity of cases and prices, and inadequate quality of service. Some complaints involved reports of vulnerable customers being subjected to pressure selling and coercion.

The CMA says that it “is keen to hear about people’s experiences with firms offering these services, over concerns that not all are complying with consumer protection law.”

The CMA is also concerned that, if a company ceases to operate, there is a risk that customers’ money or important documents may be lost.

Sarah Cardell, Chief Executive of the CMA, said:

“These services are essential to people, often at the most challenging times in their lives. The CMA is aware that rising living costs mean people are watching their spending, so shopping around for a more affordable option is attractive and sometimes a necessity.

“These may not be frequent purchases, but they are life-changing. That’s why it’s so important that we investigate so that people can select the right legal service for them – for divorce or probate or will-writing – with confidence. It’s essential that firms get the basics right, including complying with general consumer law which applies to all traders. Customers must get a fair deal.”

Another point to be made about these cheap online services is that they often try to ‘cream off’ the easy pickings of straightforward cases, where matters are agreed between the parties. But not all divorces are straightforward, and often a case that initially appears to be straightforward turns out to be anything but.

Obviously, some services may be perfectly reputable, but without proper regulation consumers have no way of knowing in advance the expertise of those offering the services, and can have difficulty seeking redress if things go wrong.

Hopefully the CMA investigation will address these issues, and ensure that consumers are properly protected.

[Family Law Cafe is a digital platform and uses regulated lawyers.]

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe expedites your case and keeps you informed and in control 24/7 using our secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image:  Blue Planet Studio  / Shutterstock.com

This week (28 November – 2 December) is ‘Good Divorce Week 2022’, an annual campaign by Resolution, the community of family justice professionals who work with families to resolve issues in a constructive fashion.

The purpose of the campaign is to encourage couples to deal with their divorce in a way that reduces conflict to a minimum.

Each year the campaign has a particular focus. This year the campaign highlights the crisis in the family courts, and raises awareness of all the different ways families can resolve their disputes away from court, where it is safe and appropriate to do so.

The family courts are certainly in crisis. Just recently HM Courts & Tribunals Service published figures showing that the backlog of cases in the family court now exceeds 110,000 cases.

The figures also showed that the number of open private law cases (i.e. cases not involving social services) stood at 85,706 in August, and that the average time for these cases to be dealt with was 43 weeks.

Clearly, these shocking figures make it even more important that divorcing couples avoid going to court, if at all possible.

And this is where the second part of this year’s campaign comes in: how to resolve disputes away from court.

Obviously, the best way to avoid court is to agree matters through negotiation.

But of course that is not always possible, in which case there are other options.

One such option is mediation, whereby the couple agree to refer their dispute (whether about arrangements for children or finances) to a trained mediator, who will help them try to resolve the dispute by agreement.

Another option is arbitration, whereby the couple agree to refer their dispute to a qualified arbitrator who will decide the dispute for them, and to be bound by the arbitrator’s decision. Arbitration is therefore similar to court proceedings, but much quicker.

Whatever route you choose to avoid court, Family Law Cafe can help. Working with you on our digital platform, we can assist you in reaching an agreed settlement, or we can advise and guide you through mediation or arbitration.

For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

It’s a simple question, and one often asked by those contemplating divorce proceedings: how long will it take?

The question is entirely understandable: for someone whose marriage has broken down the priority is to get the formalities of divorce out of the way as soon as possible, so that they can get on with their lives.

And divorce can obviously be a stressful process, so the quicker it is over, the better for all concerned.

But the question isn’t necessarily easy to answer.

In a literal sense, the question does have a simple answer: the divorce process takes a minimum of six months.

However, as we will see in a moment, the actual answer in most cases is rather more complicated.

Before we look at that, an explanation as to where the six month time period comes from.

Divorce is a two-stage process.

The process is begun by one or both of the parties issuing a divorce application, together with a statement that they consider that the marriage has broken down irretrievably.

There is then a twenty week ‘period for reflection’, intended to give the parties an opportunity to reconsider. This is the first stage of the process.

At the end of the twenty week period the applicant or applicants may confirm to the court that they wish the application to continue.

The court will then make a conditional divorce order, which ends the first stage of the process.

The second stage of the process is that there must be a six week period after the conditional order is made, before the party or parties in whose favour the conditional order was made may give notice to the court that they wish the conditional order to be made final.

When the court receives a notice it will make the conditional order final, bringing the divorce to a conclusion.

So a divorce consists of a twenty week period, followed by a six week period, a total of twenty-six weeks, or six months.

Thus the minimum time for a divorce to take is six months, although it will actually take slightly longer, as there will be a gap between the court receiving the application for the divorce to continue and making the conditional order, and between the court receiving the notice to make the conditional order final and making the final order.

But that is not the end of the story, at least in most cases.

In most cases there will be financial matters to be sorted out in connection with the divorce, and it is usually not advisable to finalise the divorce until all financial matters have been resolved, and a financial remedies order made.

The reason for this that the divorce could have financial implications.

For example, it could mean that a party loses a potential benefit under their spouse’s pension, as a pension scheme will often provide that if the pension holder dies then their spouse should benefit from the pension, but that benefit will obviously be lost if they are no longer the pension holder’s spouse. The way to prevent this is to sort out pensions before the divorce is finalised.

Of course, financial arrangements may be finalised within the six month period, but very often they take longer, meaning that the divorce will take longer – quite how long will vary from one case to another, and may very well be impossible to predict at the outset of the case.

In summary, if there are no financial matters to sort out, or if they have already been sorted out, the divorce should take a little more than six months, otherwise, it may take considerably longer.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

As the reader will no doubt be aware, a new system of no-fault divorce came into force on the 6^th of April last.

A primary aim of the system was to remove much of the animosity from the divorce process, by doing away with the need to blame the other party for the marriage breakdown.

As part of this aim the system introduced for the first time the possibility of both parties applying jointly for the divorce, to reflect the fact that sometimes the decision to divorce is a mutual one.

And new figures from HM Courts and Tribunals Service indicate how many couples are taking advantage of this possibility.

The figures relate to the new online divorce service, which was updated to meet the requirements of the new divorce system.

The figures show that in the first month of its operation the new service received a total of 12,978 divorce applications, of which 2,771 were made jointly. That means that 21 per cent, or about one fifth, of all applications in that month were made jointly.

As indicated above, joint divorce applications were not possible under the old divorce law. The change to allow them has generally been welcomed, even by some who do not like the idea of a party who has not been found to be at fault being unable to defend a divorce.

For example, in a debate about the new law in the House of Lords, Baroness Meyer, who expressed concern about the idea of no-fault divorce, said: “I welcome the new concept of divorce by mutual decision through a joint application. Anything that reduces the stress, cost and emotional aggravation of a broken-down relationship must be for the good.”

So the question is: is one-fifth of divorces being issued jointly a good level of uptake for the new law?

Obviously, the fact that a couple whose marriage has broken down decide to apply jointly for the divorce may be viewed as a good thing, and therefore the more couples that take that route the better.

On that basis, just one-fifth of divorces being issued jointly may be thought by some to be rather disappointing.

It should, however, be remembered that the possibility of joint divorce applications is something new, and it may take some time before all divorcing couples become aware of it. It may be that in a year’s time the uptake will be rather higher.

Perhaps we will just have to wait before we reach any conclusion about the uptake of joint applications.

However, a more important question about joint applications is whether there is a correlation between them and agreed divorce settlements – i.e. a joint application makes an agreed settlement more likely.

One would certainly expect there to be such a correlation (although only time will tell), and if there is then that would certainly be a good outcome for the new law.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

As readers may be aware, a new system of no-fault divorce was introduced in England and Wales on the 6^th of April.

The system does away with the need to prove that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. This means that it will no longer be necessary to blame the other party for the breakdown, by showing that they had committed adultery or behaved unreasonably.

The Courts Service has revealed that in the week following the change it received 3,000 divorce applications, which is about a 50% rise on the weekly average.

The rise in the number of divorce applications was in fact expected, especially as there was a huge drop in the number of divorces being issued in the months leading up to the change, as we reported here recently.

The general consensus amongst experts is that this surge is not part of a permanent increase in the divorce rate. There had been fears in some quarters that, in making divorce easier, the new law would lead to a long-term increase in the number of divorces, but most experts believe that this will not happen.

Indeed, the surge can be interpreted as suggesting that there may be enthusiasm for the new law, with many people waiting for it to come in so that they could divorce without the need to blame their spouse for the breakdown of the marriage.

If so, then this is a hopeful sign that people really do want to divorce without creating unnecessary animosity. This, in turn, will hopefully mean that more couples will be able to sort out arrangements for children and finances by agreement, rather than having to go to court.

The other thing that potential users of the new system will want to know is how well it is working, particularly given the number of people currently using it. After all, the new system, which is entirely online, involves quite different processes from the old one, and any completely new system is likely to suffer from teething problems.

However, the Courts Service report that things are going well. A spokesperson is quoted as saying: “Our new digital system is designed to be robust and create a better experience for users. It has been running smoothly since it launched on 6 April.”

All of which seems to be good news. It should however be pointed out that the new system only deals with the divorce itself. The law in relation to sorting out arrangements for children and finances has not changed.

So if you are going through a divorce it is still strongly recommended that you seek expert legal advice. We can find you an expert that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

As readers may well be aware, we are about to get a new, no-fault, divorce system in England and Wales. And the details of the changeover from the old system to the new one are becoming clear.

Firstly, the Courts Service has confirmed that it will be effectively closing down the current divorce system on Thursday 31^st of March. After that date it will not accept any new divorce petitions (whether online or on paper), save in urgent cases where the issue of the divorce petition is time critical, such as when a freezing injunction is needed to prevent the other party from disposing of assets.

Meanwhile, the Government has passed regulations confirming that the new divorce system will come into force on Wednesday 6^th of April (whilst we had previously been told that the new system would come into operation on that date, up until now there had been no official confirmation).

But why the delay between closing the old system and bringing in the new? After all, there will be three working days when, save in urgent situations, it will not be possible to apply for a divorce – an exceptional situation.

The Courts Service has explained the delay by saying that it needs the time to prepare the new system, in particular the online portal via which divorces are issued and processed. Exactly why an online portal cannot be switched from one system to another overnight, or at least over a weekend, has not been explained.

Whatever, hopefully all of this will mean that there will be a smooth transition from the old system to the new.

And what about ‘old system’ divorces that have not been finalised by the 31^st of March? Here, the Courts Service have reassured customers that Decree Nisi and Decree Absolute applications that have been issued will be saved, and will remain available on the service.

Lastly, it is important to note that these changes only apply to the divorce itself. The law and procedure in relation to financial remedies on divorce will remain the same under the new divorce system, as will the law and procedure used to resolve disputes between separating parents over arrangements for their children.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe helps you get to the best outcome in your family law matter. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Nick Fewings on Unsplash

On the 6^th of April we will see the biggest change to divorce law for at least fifty years, with the introduction of a ‘no-fault’ system.

But what exactly will this mean for anyone wishing to take divorce proceedings? How will things be different from the old system?

No blame, no waiting

The first and obvious change is that it will no longer be necessary to blame your spouse for the breakdown of the marriage, by showing that they had committed adultery or behaved unreasonably.

All that will be needed is to file a statement with the court saying that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. The court must accept the statement as proof that the marriage has broken down irretrievably.

And hopefully this will mean that without the unnecessary animosity caused by attributing blame there will be a better chance of the parties sorting out arrangements for children and finances by agreement.

It will also of course not be necessary to wait until you have been separated for at least two years, before you can divorce without the need to attribute blame.

Joint applications

It is often the case that both parties want a divorce, but under the present system only one party can issue divorce proceedings.

This will also change. Under the new system a divorce application can be made jointly by both parties, who will also file a joint statement that the marriage has broken down irretrievably.

Again, this will hopefully mean more amicable divorces.

The end of defended divorce

Until now it has always been possible for the party in receipt of divorce proceedings to defend the divorce. Defending divorce proceedings will inevitably increase the costs, and mean that the divorce will take longer. It is even possible that the court could refuse to allow the divorce.

Thankfully, all of this will also change. Under the new system it will simply be impossible to defend divorce proceedings.

Period for reflection

But the new system will include a mechanism to ensure that a divorce will only be granted if the party or parties applying for it are sure that they want the divorce to go through.

Under the new system they can only apply for a conditional divorce order (the equivalent of the decree nisi under the present system), confirming that they want the divorce to continue, after a twenty week ‘period for reflection’ has elapsed since the date that the divorce was started.

And a further six weeks must elapse after the conditional order, before the final divorce order (the equivalent of the present decree absolute) can be made.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe gets you to the best outcome in your family law case. Contact us for a chat to see if we can help.

Photo by Zoriana Stakhniv on Unsplash

The Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) has published its latest figures for divorces in England and Wales, for the year 2020, and one headline stands out.

The headline is that the number of divorces granted fell by 4.5%, compared to the previous year. The decrease was amongst opposite-sex couples, with the number of opposite-sex divorces reducing from 107,599 in 2019 to 102,438 in 2020, a fall of 4.8%.

The reasons behind the decrease are not yet clear, but it is believed that the pandemic has been the main factor. The ONS point out that the Ministry of Justice has previously reported that family court activities were affected by the pandemic during 2020, including the temporary suspension of operations by some courts for a period of time. They say that this may have impacted the number and timeliness of completed divorces in 2020, but admit that it is difficult to know the extent of the impact.

Another theory is that the pandemic simply caused fewer couples to issue divorce proceedings, deciding to ‘stick together’, at least until the pandemic is over. If this is the case, then obviously we may see a post-pandemic surge in divorces.

As to same-sex divorces, the figures show a different story. In 2020, there were 1,154 divorces among same-sex couples, increasing by 40.4% from 2019. Of course, this increase is simply due to the fact that same-sex divorce has only been possible since 2015, and it is therefore to be expected that the numbers will be going up, before they eventually stabilise.

The statistics also include other information, apart from just the number of divorces.

They tell us, for example, that unreasonable behaviour was the most common reason for wives petitioning for divorce among opposite-sex couples, and two years’ separation the most common reason for husbands. Of course, when no-fault divorce is introduced in April it will no longer be necessary to give a reason for the breakdown of the marriage.

They also tell us that once again amongst opposite-sex couples wives were responsible for the vast majority of divorces (64,076, against 38,362 granted to husbands).

Lastly, the statistics include figures for the average duration of marriage at the time of divorce. For opposite-sex couples this was 11.9 years, a decrease from 12.4 years in 2019. For same-sex couples it was 4.7 years for female couples and 5.4 years for male couples, although again this is affected by the short time it has been possible for same-sex couples to get divorced.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe helps you get to the best outcome in your family law matter. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

The rapid approach of no-fault divorce in April was emphasised last week when new rules were published by the government setting out the process that the new divorce system will follow.

The rules are a reminder of some of the interesting ways in which the new system will differ from the present system, so we thought we would take a quick look.

The rules include the following matters relating to the new divorce system:

1. Firstly, they provide a definition of “disputed proceedings”, to reflect the limited grounds on which it will be possible to dispute divorce proceedings. In particular, it will no longer be possible to defend divorce proceedings, on the basis that the marriage has not irretrievably broken down. An answer to a divorce application may still be filed by the party who receives the application, but only disputing the validity of the marriage, or the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the proceedings.

2. Secondly, the rules introduce a new ‘minimum period’ of 20 weeks for divorce, from the date on which the court issues the application before a party can apply for the conditional divorce order (the equivalent of the present decree nisi). The purpose of this period “is to allow sufficient time to ensure certainty around the intention of divorce, and greater opportunity for couples to agree practical arrangements for the future where reconciliation is not possible, and divorce is inevitable.”

3. Thirdly, the rules set out the procedure to be followed on joint applications – the new system allows for the first time both parties to jointly make the divorce application.

4. Lastly, the rules reflect the new terminology that will be used under the new system. For example, ‘Petition’ will become ‘Application’, ‘Petitioner’ will become ‘Applicant’, ‘Decree Nisi’ will become ‘Conditional Order’, and ‘Decree Absolute’ will become ‘Final Order’.

These new rules will obviously come into force on the same day as the new divorce law, which is currently fixed for the 6^th of April. Hopefully, they will ensure that the new system operates smoothly.

For a discussion upon whether you should wait for the new system before issuing divorce proceedings, see this post.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Thomas Martinsen on Unsplash

So-called ‘Divorce Day’, the first working Monday of the New Year, is with us again next week.

Divorce Day is supposed to be busiest day of the year for divorce lawyers, when more people commence divorce proceedings than on any other day. The theory behind it, if one can call it that, is that that a fractious family Christmas was the last straw for their marriages. Or perhaps they have just decided that the New Year is the time to make a new start.

There is much debate as to whether Divorce Day is a real phenomenon, or just something created by the popular media.

But if you are one of the people who has decided that you want a divorce that debate is, of course, academic.

What may be more important on this particular Divorce Day is whether you proceed now, or wait until the new no-fault divorce system comes into force in April, as we mentioned in a post here last week.

As we explained in that post, no-fault divorce is likely in many cases to be much more ‘amicable’ than a divorce under the present system, unless you have already been separated for at least two years. If you haven’t, then under the present system you will only be able to get a divorce by proving that your spouse is responsible for the marriage breakdown, because of their adultery or ‘unreasonable behaviour’.

Attributing blame in this way and making allegations against your spouse may obviously make them less amenable to agreeing other important matters, such as arrangements for children and finances.

It is generally believed that no-fault divorce is a better way. So would it be better to wait?

There are a number of factors to consider, including the following.

Firstly, there is no point in waiting if you have been separated for two years and your spouse consents to a divorce under the present system – the divorce should already be reasonably amicable.

Secondly, you may need to get the divorce under way quickly so that you can make a financial remedies application – in this case it may be best not to wait.

However, if you fear that your spouse may defend the divorce then it would almost certainly be best to wait, as it will not be possible to defend a divorce under the no-fault system.

Lastly, you may want to consider the time that the divorce will take. Under the present system it is possible to get a divorce in as little as three months, whereas under the no-fault system the divorce will take a minimum of six months.

If you are unsure whether to divorce now or wait you should seek the advice of an expert family lawyer. We can find you an expert lawyer that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Café gets you to the best outcome in your family law case. Contact us for a chat to see if we can help.

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash

As the old year draws to a close we look forward to the new one, which will usher in arguably the biggest change ever in divorce law in England and Wales.

The civil courts in England and Wales have been handing down divorces for some 160 years. Throughout that time the law that they have applied has been based upon the concept of fault for the breakdown of the marriage. If one party wanted a divorce they usually had to prove that the other party was in some way to blame for the breakdown.

Over the years fault took various forms: adultery, cruelty and other “matrimonial offences”, as they were called. Only in 1969 did the law first allow divorces without fault, but only if the parties had been separated for two years and the respondent to the divorce consented, or five years if they did not.

All that history is going to be swept away next year. Fault will finally become a thing of the past, bringing our divorce laws into the modern age.

From the 6th of April 2022 all that will be required to get a divorce is a statement from one or both of the parties that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. There will be no need to prove irretrievable breakdown – the court will accept the statement as proof that the marriage has broken down irretrievably. And if the statement is by one party only the other party will not have an opportunity to challenge it – defended divorces will also become a thing of the past.

This new system of no-fault divorce has been virtually universally welcomed. It has been understood for many years that attributing blame for the breakdown of a marriage has been an artificial and, in most cases, futile exercise. The need to attribute blame has also brought the law into disrepute, with many people exaggerating, or even inventing, allegations against the other party.

But it is hoped that doing away with this ‘blame game’, as it has been called, will do something more.

Many respondents to divorce proceedings are unsurprisingly aggrieved to be told that the breakdown of the marriage was all their fault, and are unhappy about the allegations that have been made against them. This can naturally make them less amenable when it comes to trying to agree arrangements for children and finances.

The hope is that no-fault divorce will make it more likely that couples will be able to resolve these important matters amicably, rather than having to argue them through the courts.

Whether this will actually happen we will have to wait and see. But one thing is certain: divorce will never be the same again.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Moritz Knöringer on Unsplash

In an important development for anyone contemplating divorce the Government has announced that the new system of no-fault divorce will not now be introduced this autumn, but will instead be delayed until next spring.

In an answer to a parliamentary question upon the implementation of the reform Chris Philp MP explained on behalf of the Government that the original implementation timetable had been ambitious and that the necessary changes to the Courts Service’s online divorce system would not be completed before the end of the year. Accordingly, the reform will not come into force until the 6^th of April 2022.

Whilst it is welcome that the reform now has a fixed start-date, the delay obviously has serious implications for those considering commencing divorce proceedings.

To recap, the new system will do away with the need to prove that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, for example due to the other party committing adultery or behaving unreasonably. This removal of blame from the divorce process has been widely welcomed.

Instead, all that will be needed is for one or both of the parties to file a document with the court simply stating that the marriage has broken down irretrievably – the court will accept this as proof of irretrievable breakdown.

A minimum period of 20 weeks will then have to elapse before the court can make a conditional divorce order, and a further six weeks must pass before the court can make a final divorce order. No-fault divorces will therefore take a minimum of 26 weeks, longer than a quick divorce can take at present.

Obviously, those wanting to divorce without having to blame the other party for the breakdown of the marriage may now have to wait longer to get divorced, if they have not been separated for two years (under the present system you can divorce after two years separation, if the other party consents).

On the other hand, those who are content to use the present system will obviously have more time to do so, perhaps enabling them to get a divorce more quickly than under the new system.

If you are contemplating divorce you should seek the advice of an expert family lawyer. We can find you an expert lawyer that works with you on our digital platform. For more information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Public Domain, via Piqsels

The Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) has published its latest annual statistics for divorces in England and Wales, for 2019.

The headline finding from the statistics is that the number of divorces increased by a huge 18% from the previous year. There were 107,599 divorces of opposite-sex couples in 2019, increasing from 90,871 in 2018.

The ONS does warn, however, that the scale of this increase partly reflects that divorce centres were processing a backlog of casework in 2018, which is likely to have translated into a higher number of completed divorces in 2019.

Nevertheless, the rise in the number of divorces may be significant, resulting in the highest number of opposite-sex divorces recorded since 2014, when 111,169 divorces were granted in England and Wales. It is also the largest annual percentage increase in the number of divorces since 1972, following the introduction of the Divorce Reform Act 1969, which made it easier for couples to divorce upon separation.

The statistics also show that there were 822 divorces among same-sex couples in 2019, nearly twice the number in 2018. This perhaps reflects that more time has passed since same-sex marriage was legalised in 2014.

Other findings from the statistics were that unreasonable behaviour was once again the most common reason for opposite-sex couples divorcing in 2019, with 49% of wives and 35% of husbands petitioning on these grounds (it was also the most common reason for same-sex couples divorcing, accounting for 63% of divorces among women and 70% among men), and that in 2019 the average (median) duration of marriage at the time of divorce was 12.3 years for opposite-sex couples, a small decrease from 12.5 years in the previous year.

Kanak Ghosh, of the Vital Statistics Outputs Branch at the ONS commented:

“Same-sex couples have been able to marry in England and Wales from March 2014. Since then, we have seen the number of divorces of same-sex couples increase each year from very small numbers in 2015 when the first divorces took place, to more than 800 in 2019, reflecting the increasing size of the same-sex married population in England and Wales.

“While we see that 56% of same-sex marriages were among females, nearly three-quarters of same-sex divorces in 2019 were to female couples. Unreasonable behaviour, which includes adultery, was the most common ground for divorce among same-sex couples this year as almost two-thirds of couples divorced for this reason.”

You can find the ONS statistical bulletin here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Stephan Henning on Unsplash

The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, under which a system of no-fault divorce will be introduced, has passed through both houses of parliament. The Bill now just requires the Royal Assent before it becomes law.

However, the Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland QC has warned that the new law is unlikely to be implemented until autumn 2021, as “time needs to be allowed for careful implementation”. This will include the making of the necessary rules and procedures to give effect to the law, which will obviously be quite different to the present system.

All of which begs the question: what do you do if you want to commence divorce proceedings? Do you proceed under the present law, or wait for the new law to come in?

At the moment, in view of how far the new law is still away, the answer must generally be that you should proceed now, unless you will have to wait anyway for the requisite period of separation to elapse. (If you can’t or don’t want to issue divorce proceedings now on the basis of the other party’s adultery or unreasonable behaviour, you have to wait until you have been separated for two years if the other party consents to the divorce, or for five years if they do not consent.)

However, as we get closer to the introduction of the new law, then more and more people will no doubt prefer to wait, rather than have to apportion blame for the marriage breakdown under the present system.

And if you believe that your spouse will defend divorce proceedings, then it may be more appropriate to wait, as defended divorce proceedings will not be possible under the new system.

If you want further advice as to whether to commence divorce proceedings you should consult an expert family lawyer. Family Law Café can put you in touch with such a lawyer – for further information, call us on 020 3904 0506, or click here, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Timothy Eberly on Unsplash

After a campaign for reform lasting at least thirty years it seems that we may finally be about to get a system of no-fault divorce.

The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, which will bring in the reform, is due to have its second reading in the House of Commons today. Whilst some MPs have voiced their concerns about the reform, it has widespread support, and is expected to pass. In fact, it has been reported that ministers are keen to see the legislation receive royal assent as soon as the end of this week.

To briefly recap, the Bill intends to do away with the need to attribute blame in a divorce. It will no longer therefore be necessary (for example) to allege that the other party has committed adultery or behaved unreasonably (at least until the parties have been separated for two years). The Bill also removes the possibility of defending the divorce.

Instead, there will be a procedure whereby when a party applies for a divorce they will simply file with the application a statement that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, and the court will accept that as proof that the marriage has indeed broken down irretrievably. Twenty weeks later the court can make a conditional divorce order, and six weeks after that the divorce can be finalised.

As mentioned, some MPs have indicated their opposition to the reform. However, Resolution, the association of family lawyers, have written an open letter addressing some of their major concerns. The letter can be found here. Hopefully, its contents will help reassure MPs and the Bill will pass, without significant alteration.

Before we get too carried away, however, it should be pointed out that the new law is unlikely to come into effect until some months after the Bill receives royal assent. There will be a lot of regulations to be made, and generally time will be needed to prepare for the new system.

Still, hopefully we will soon have a divorce system that does away with the ‘blame game’, thereby enabling couples to concentrate with less chance of animosity upon the issues that really matter, such as arrangements for children and sorting out finances.

UPDATE: The Bill passed its second reading by 231 votes to 16. It now goes to the committee stage in the Commons.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Aw Creative on Unsplash

You have just been served with divorce papers. Perhaps you expected them, perhaps you did not. They may make you angry, they may make you sad.

Whatever, it is likely to be an extremely stressful moment, and that stress could colour how you respond. But it is essential that, no matter how tempting, you do not respond in the wrong way.

Here are five typical things that you should NOT do if you receive divorce papers:

1. Lose your temper with your spouse – As we said, receiving the divorce papers may make you angry. This could be because you don’t believe that the breakdown of the marriage was your fault, because you are unhappy about allegations against you contained in the divorce petition, or simply because you don’t want a divorce. You may lose your temper and want to confront your spouse. Don’t. It will not achieve anything, and is only likely to make things worse. Remember that under our present divorce system one party usually has to ‘blame’ the other for the breakdown of the marriage – your spouse may have had no other option.

2. Tear up the papers – Yes, it does happen. But it is not going to stop the divorce. Without going into the details, your spouse will still be able to proceed with the divorce, and your actions may just have increased the costs of the divorce, which you may have to pay.

3. Ignore the papers – This also does happen, all too often. But it is not going to make the divorce go away. Again, your spouse will still be able to proceed with the divorce.

4. Stop paying for things – You may still be paying for things that your spouse benefits from, for example the mortgage on the matrimonial home, or the repayments on the car that they are using. Receiving the divorce papers may tempt you to stop paying these things. But doing so may cause you further trouble. Don’t have a ‘knee-jerk’ reaction – take advice first, and as quickly as you can.

5. Defend or cross petition without thought – This is often the first thought of anyone who doesn’t want a divorce, or who is aggrieved at being blamed for the breakdown of the marriage. Yes, in some (rare) circumstances it may be the best thing to do, but it may also be a huge mistake, which will only cause the divorce to drag out and be much more expensive.

Of course, what you SHOULD do if you receive divorce papers is take expert legal advice. Family Law Cafe can organise your response and sort out everything that needs to be done. For further information about what we can do for you call us on 020 3904 0506, or click the ‘Sign up’ button at the top of the page, and fill in the form.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Nadine Shaabana on Unsplash

As now seems to occur at this time most years, there is speculation in the  media that the end of the summer holidays will see a rise in the number of people getting divorced.

Such speculation is becoming as common as the idea of ‘divorce day’, the first day of the first working week after the Christmas/New Year break, when more people are supposed to instruct lawyers to start divorce proceedings than any other day of the year.

But is there any truth in it?

Possible reasons put forward for an increase in divorces at the end of summer are similar to those put forward for divorce day, including the holidays forcing families to be together, thereby highlighting problems in relationships, and disappointment at family holidays not being as wonderful as expected. Another possible reason is that children go off to university at the end of the summer, forcing their parents to live on their own for the first time in years. It has also been suggested that people are more likely to meet someone new in the summer holidays!

Whether there is any truth in any of this, we don’t know.

The simple fact is that marriages can break down at any time, and if your marriage has broken down, the timing is likely to be immaterial. The important thing is to seek expert legal advice, as soon as you can. Family Law Cafe can help you find that advice. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Image: ‘Beach’, by David Martyn Hunt, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The Law Society, the professional body that represents solicitors in England and Wales, has raised concerns about the Government’s Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, which is intended to introduce a system of no-fault divorce.

The Society says that whilst it welcomes the Bill and supports the introduction of no-fault divorce, it considers that “there are still important details that need to be addressed to ensure that the Bill is clear, fair and accessible to those who need to use it.” (For a brief overview of what the Bill will do, in its current form, see this post.)

In particular the Society is concerned that the Bill proposes that the 20 week period of notice before a divorce order can be made should run from the start of proceedings. The Society believes that this is unfair on the respondent, who may receive the divorce papers long after the start of proceedings, whether due to court delays, interference from the petitioner in delaying receipt by the respondent, the simple length of time of delivery if abroad, or other administrative reasons.

Instead, the Society proposes that the 20 week period should not begin until the respondent has been served with the divorce application.

However, supporters of the Bill in its current form point out that if such an amendment were made respondents could deliberately avoid service, or even suggest that they will only accept service if the petitioner agrees to their terms regarding financial matters, or arrangements for children.

Clearly, this matter requires careful consideration.

You can read all of the Law Society’s concerns about the Bill, and its proposed amendments to it, in its written evidence for the Divorce, Dissolution & Separation Public Bill Committee, which can be found here.

Family Law Cafe will be watching with interest to see what, if any, significant amendments are made to the Bill as it passes through parliament. The Bill has just gone through committee stage and is now due to have its report stage and third reading, on a date to be announced.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image: Law Society, Chancery Lane, London by The wub [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

The Ministry of Justice has published its latest statistical bulletin presenting statistics on activity in the Family courts of England and Wales, and providing figures for the latest quarter (January to March 2019).

The bulletin shows that in that period there was an increase in the number of divorce petitions, alongside an increase in timeliness of divorce proceedings. Divorce petitions were up 6% compared to same period in the previous year. As to timeliness, the average time from the date of petition to the pronouncement of the decree nisi was 33 weeks, up 6 weeks from the same period in 2018, whilst the average time from petition to decree absolute was 59 weeks. The Ministry of Justice says that these represent the highest figures so far for the periods covered by the bulletin, and are a result of divorce centres processing a backlog of older cases.

The eleven divorce centres, which now deal with all divorce cases, have been heavily criticised for being inefficient, including by the former President of the Family Division Sir James Munby. In February we reported here that delays at the country’s largest divorce centre at Bury St Edmunds reached ‘unprecedented levels’ in 2018. As we said then, longer divorces cause increased stress and suffering for people going through what is already one of the most difficult times in their lives. It is therefore imperative that these problems are resolved. How that might happen is not clear, although the current President Sir Andrew McFarlane recently hinted that the centres might be phased out and replaced by an online system.

You can find the statistical bulletin here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Ministry of Justice, by morebyless, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

We reported back in February that the justice secretary, David Gauke, had confirmed that he would bring in legislation enacting no-fault divorce. The legislation was introduced into the House of Commons, in the form of the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, last Thursday.

The Bill will:

• Replace the current requirement to evidence either a conduct (i.e. adultery or ‘unreasonable behaviour’) or separation ‘fact’ as proof of the breakdown of the marriage with the provision of a statement of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage (couples can opt to make this a joint statement).

• Remove the possibility of contesting the decision to divorce, as a statement will be conclusive evidence that the marriage has broken down.

• Introduce a new minimum period of 20 weeks from the start of proceedings to confirmation to the court that a ‘conditional order’ (which will replace the present ‘decree nisi’) may be made, allowing greater opportunity for reflection and, where couples cannot reconcile and divorce is inevitable, agreeing practical arrangements for the future. (The divorce cannot be finalised until six weeks have elapsed after the date of the conditional order.)

Mr Gauke said:

“Marriage will always be a vitally important institution in society, but when a relationship breaks down it cannot be right that the law adds fuel to the fire by incentivising couples to blame each other.

“By removing the unnecessary mudslinging the current process can needlessly rake up, we’ll make sure the law plays its part in allowing couples to move on as amicably and constructively as possible.

“I’m proud to introduce this important legislation which will make a genuine difference to many children and families.”

And Margaret Heathcote, Chair of Resolution, the association of family lawyers, commented:

“We’re delighted that the government is introducing legislation which will help reduce conflict between divorcing couples.

“Every day, our members are helping people through separation, taking a constructive, non-confrontational approach in line with our Code of Practice. However, because of our outdated divorce laws, they’ve been working effectively with one arm tied behind their backs.

“These proposals have the support of the public, politicians, and professionals. We therefore call on MPs and members of the House of Lords to pass this Bill without unnecessary delay, and end the blame game for divorcing couples as soon as possible.”

Family Law Cafe are also delighted that the Bill has been introduced, and hope that it will be quickly passed, so that all matrimonial disputes can be resolved without the necessity for attributing blame for the breakdown of the marriage, thereby increasing the chances of the parties resolving matters amicably.

MPs will next consider the Bill at its Second Reading, the date for which has not yet been announced.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image of David Gauke: Chris McAndrew [CC BY 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons

For most couples, the personal affair of divorce is dealt with away from prying eyes – but spare a thought for Adele, who is to divorce from Simon Konecki, writes Joanna Toch

A divorce is rarely a pleasant affair, and despite the recent changes to law which will soon make it possible for couples to divorce without ascribing blame to one party, the fact is that the person you once intended on spending your life with is no longer by your side, and the division of assets can be an immensely distressing experience. When there are children involved, the process is inevitably even more emotionally charged.

For most couples, this intensely personal affair is dealt with away from prying eyes – but spare a thought for the likes of Adele, who this month announced her divorce from Simon Konecki, to the interest of tabloids up and down the country. There are however steps that can be taken to keep information out of the public eye, and it seems that Adele may have successfully used these, opting for out of court procedures to transfer properties, and agree the financial and childcare aspects outside of a courtroom. Fiercely protective of their six year old son, the couple have done all they could not to wash their dirty linen in public.

It is not easy, though: for couples in the public eye, a divorce is considered fair game by journalists, whose editors’ opinion is generally that their decision to be a celebrity means that no aspect of their private life is off limits. At an already stressful time, this intrusion can feel almost impossible to handle.

Rules of court allow journalists to attend private court hearings to which members of the public are denied, but judges have expressed differing views on what they can report, and whether people can be named, making it tricky to predict the media fallout of a high profile divorce. There is also inconsistency between the different levels of court – if the case goes to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, parties are routinely named, whereas at a lower level they may or may not be.

The dissolution of a marriage is a fact of public record, and the decree hearing is always open to both the public and the press. No matter how much you may want to, you cannot hide the fact of being divorced from the public.

That said, there are laws that can be utilised to limit the volume and type of coverage if you’re in the public eye and, where there are children involved, it is easier for your lawyer to argue that intense media scrutiny could cause damage to those children. The court generally, though not always, protects the privacy of children: it is a criminal offence to report a children’s case while it is happening, and the court can rule that reporting restrictions should endure indefinitely.

There is no guarantee the court will grant a request for anonymity: in the case of Spencer v Spencer in 2009 (where one of the parties was Earl Spencer), Lord Justice Mumby declined to grant the request of both parties for a media gagging order. Mumby argued that it would be “potentially dangerous, very dangerous, territory……. to privilege one group of the community – those who attract the attention of the media – over and above another group who do not.”

So, what should you do if you are seeking a divorce and suspect the media will take an interest? The fact of your divorce will unavoidably end up in the public domain, but the details of, for example, your financial settlement can still be protected by taking the following steps:

Choose your lawyer wisely

It sounds simple enough, but it is crucial that you speak to the right lawyer early on to ensure that you do not take your case down a fruitless and expensive path. There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach to divorce, so you need to appoint an appropriately skilled lawyer to look at your situation and develop the right strategy at outset.

Consider out of court options

Your lawyer should advise you to engage in mediation. Through this process, voluntary disclosure and mutual pursuit of a consent order, the details of a divorce can be concluded out of court and with minimal or no acrimony. If court proceedings do start, you can ask the other party to have private lawyer-led mediation within the proceedings, where a lawyer considers each party’s position and advises on settlement.

You may also wish to consider binding arbitration. In these cases, the parties choose their judge and the arbitration process takes place in private. The court will then make an order laying out the terms of the divorce.

As acrimonious as these things can be, there are three major benefits to keeping the contest out of court : you will save yourself significant legal fees, avoid a protracted courtroom battle, and finally the case will never be heard in court in front of journalists.

Embrace technology

The idea of taking hours out of a day to sit in a room with an ex-partner and discuss the allocation of assets may fill many with dread, but there are a number of ways to ensure that your time is not wasted during the process, such as online portals that allow documents and case materials to be held securely online and accessed only when needed.

In a world in which all of us can bank, shop and even buy a property online, there is equally no need to spend hours in a lawyer’s office these days. For those who have busy schedules or are finding the process more taxing that it needs to be, systems such as these can be a lifeline. It is important to investigate the options available and find one that best fits your needs.

None of us wants to launder our dirty linen in public. A divorce is not a pleasant process, but with strategic thinking, a good lawyer, a willingness to settle outside of court and embracing technology, it needn’t a public one.

Joanna Toch is founder of the Family Law Café, an ‘online service which provides access to the best lawyers, saves time and improve the efficiency of the legal process’.

This article first appeared in Spear’s Magazine.

Image of Adele by Marc E. [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

It has been reported in the popular press that Brad Pitt, concerned that his wife Angelina Jolie is delaying their divorce, has issued her with an ‘ultimatum’ to sign the divorce papers, or else he will ask the court to impose a fine on her. Such a procedure is not available here, but what can you do if your spouse is delaying the divorce?

Well, it depends upon whether you are the party taking the divorce proceedings, the basis of the divorce, and the stage that it has reached.

If you issued the divorce petition then you may be able to proceed with the divorce even if your spouse has failed to acknowledge receipt of the divorce papers. If you can prove that they have received the papers (for example by having a process server personally serve the papers upon them), then you can ask the court to proceed with the divorce. However, you will still have to prove the basis of the divorce. If the divorce is on the basis of your spouse’s ‘unreasonable behaviour’, or five years separation, then this may not be a problem. However, if the divorce is on the basis of your spouse’s adultery then you will need to prove the adultery without an admission from them, and if the divorce is on the basis of two years separation, then you will not be able to proceed without your spouse’s consent to the divorce.

If you did not issue the divorce then, if the decree nisi has not been pronounced, there is nothing that you can do to force the divorce through, other than to issue a cross-petition of your own. However, if the decree nisi has been pronounced then you can yourself apply for the decree absolute, finalising the divorce, three months after your spouse could have applied, i.e six weeks plus three months after the date that the decree nisi was pronounced.

There is another issue that can be a factor in how long a divorce takes: the financial settlement. Often, a divorce should not be finalised until the settlement has been reached. In that case, you should obviously seek to reach a settlement as soon as possible, whether by agreement or court order.

The above is a brief summary of the law. For further details, please contact us. To book a free initial consultation, click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt by Georges Biard [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

It has been reported that singer and actress Fergie Duhamel wants to revert to her birth name of Stacy Ann Ferguson, when she divorces her husband Josh Duhamel. It is, of course, quite common for a wife to want to revert to her maiden name when she divorces, but just what is involved?

The reports state that Fergie has asked the judge dealing with her divorce to legally change her name. However, that is not how it works in this country – changing names is not a function of the divorce courts here.

In this country your name is quite simply what you want other people to call you. Accordingly, you can change your name at any time, and technically you don’t need to take any legal steps to effect the change. However, it may be necessary to have some documentary proof of the name change, as this will be required by certain organisations you may have to deal with. In that case, you can have a simple change of name deed drawn up. You can then send the signed deed, or a certified copy, to anyone who requires proof of your name change.

It should be noted, however, that you cannot change the name of your children when you divorce, without either the consent of the other parent (and anyone else with parental responsibility), or a court order. Courts are not usually prepared to agree to the change of a child’s name, unless there is a very good reason.

For further details regarding change of name on divorce, see this post. If you require more specific advice, then please contact us. To book a free initial consultation, click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image of Fergie by Craig ONeal [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Boris Johnson is back in the news, and not just because he is the front-runner in the race to be the next leader of the Conservative Party. Stories in the popular news media are telling us that he is seeking a ‘quickie divorce’ from his present wife within the next six weeks, so that his new partner can move in to Number 10 Downing Street with him, if he wins the leadership contest and becomes Prime Minister.

But as we already know, there is no such thing as a ‘quickie divorce’. So will Mr Johnson get a divorce that quickly? The answer is: ‘it depends’.

A divorce cannot normally take place from start to finish within six weeks. The divorce petition has to be issued, the court must deal with the papers, a date is fixed for the pronouncement of the decree nisi, and only six weeks after that can the divorce be finalised. Even with the best will in the world, that process will take at least three months, and usually six months or more. In addition, a divorce is not usually finalised until a financial settlement has been reached, which may mean the divorce takes considerably longer than that.

However, we know that Mr Johnson’s divorce was issued last September, and it has been reported that he may have reached a financial settlement with his wife. If that is so, it could be that the divorce can now be finalised quite quickly. However, so far as we are aware, the decree nisi has not yet been pronounced and, as we have seen, six weeks must elapse after that before the divorce can be finalised by the decree absolute. Accordingly, it would appear that Mr Johnson will not be divorced in time to take his new partner with him through the door to Number 10, assuming he wins the leadership contest.

It has also been reported that Mr Johnson hopes to marry his new partner whilst he is Prime Minister. If he does, then he will be the first Prime Minister to marry whilst in office in the last 250 years. Only two sitting Prime Ministers have married whilst in office, the last being Augustus FitzRoy, in 1769.

If you would like more information regarding the length of time it takes to divorce, Family Law Cafe can help. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image: TV Interview With Boris by Garry Knight, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

As will now be well known, the Ministry of Justice intends to press ahead with the introduction of no-fault divorce, as soon as Parliamentary time allows. The reform has been welcomed in many quarters, but there are still some who oppose it.

Last month Fiona Bruce, Conservative MP for Congleton, asked the Lord Chancellor David Gauke in the House of Commons the following question:

“…what is the justification for the Government cherry-picking not just public opinion, which, according to the responses to their own consultation, is 80% against the proposed changes, but the evidence they rely on, with Ministers seeming to ignore evidence that there will be an immediate spike in divorce rates, which will impact negatively on the families involved?”

Mr Gauke replied:

“I have to disagree with my hon. Friend on this point. It is true that there was a surge of submissions to our consultation in the last couple of weeks, but the fact is that a YouGov poll on the day the proposals were set out suggested 73% support for them. Indeed, we have had support from the Law Society, Resolution, the Family Law Bar Association, Sir Paul Coleridge—the chair of the Marriage Foundation—Relate and National Family Mediation. This reform will help families and ensure that the divorce process is less acrimonious.”

Notwithstanding that reply, Ms Bruce, who is also a solicitor, has told the Law Society Gazette that “the government has cherry-picked the evidence and ignored the warnings that these changes will make divorce easier.” She went on:

“The removal of fault sends out the signal that marriage can be unilaterally exited on notice by one party with little, if any, available recourse for the party who has been left. There will be far less pressure, or incentive, to work at the relationship in such circumstances.”

But is it true that no-fault divorce is likely to lead to a spike in the number of divorces? We are not so sure that it is.

We do not believe that many people take divorce proceedings lightly, irrespective of the law. They only go ahead with divorce when they are certain that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, and all avenues aimed at repairing it have already been explored. They are not more likely to get divorced simply because the system is easier. And having a system that makes it more difficult to get divorced will not save a broken marriage, it will only prolong it.

The introduction of no-fault divorce is not about making divorce easier. As Mr Gauke said, it is about making it less acrimonious. Removing the need for one party to attribute blame for the breakdown of the marriage to the other party is likely to reduce conflict, and therefore increase the likelihood of the parties settling other matters, such as arrangements for children and finances, by agreement.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image: Ministry of Justice Plaque, by Simon Gibson, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Recent news reports have claimed that singer-songwriter Adele has ‘secretly divorced’ her husband, Simon Konecki. But is it possible to get a ‘secret divorce’?

It is certainly possible to be discreet about the fact that you are not getting divorced: not ‘broadcasting’ the fact and, in the case of celebrities, not informing the media. However, like marriage, divorce is a matter of public record. It is not therefore possible to keep it entirely secret.

When the court is satisfied that you are entitled to a divorce, it will pronounce the ‘decree nisi’. A list of cases due for the pronouncement will be published by the court, and can be seen on the court’s public noticeboard. The pronouncement itself takes place in a hearing in open court, at which anyone can attend (although usually no one does!).

And after the divorce has been finalised, details of it (or at least of the decree absolute) will be placed on a central index of decrees absolute maintained by the Central Family Court in London. Anyone can search the index, and can obtain a copy of the decree absolute, for a small fee. Divorce case files for older divorces up to 1937 are held at The National Archives.

So it is not possible to be divorced in secret, no matter what the headline writers may say!

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image of Adele by Marc E. [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

The Nuffield Foundation has published a report exploring the legal and procedural details of the divorce process in selected other jurisdictions. The analysis was conducted to inform policy debates about how the law in England and Wales might be reformed in practice.

As we reported here, the justice secretary, David Gauke, recently confirmed that he will bring in legislation enacting no-fault divorce, in the next session of Parliament. However, the detail of the legislation is still to be decided. The Nuffield Foundation report examines what lessons can be drawn from eight other comparable jurisdictions: Australia, California, Colorado, Finland, Germany, New Zealand, Spain and Sweden.

The report indicates that the Government’s proposal for no-fault divorce is fully consistent with international trends. Indeed, the report finds that there is an international trend away from requiring any ground for divorce at all. However, the report’s authors say that the Government’s proposed process for divorce “is somewhat onerous compared to other countries.”

Amongst the issues that the report looked at were the time periods required for the divorce process (the Government is proposing that there be a minimum period of six months between the granting of a decree nisi and the granting of a decree absolute), whether the divorce can be defended, and whether the marriage should be of a minimum duration before a divorce can take place (the Government is proposing that the current bar on issuing a divorce in the first year of marriage be retained).

You can read the report here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image: Family Law Cafe (flags in public domain)

It has been reported that delays at the country’s largest Divorce Centre at Bury St Edmunds reached ‘unprecedented levels’ in 2018.

The report, contained in the Law Society Gazette, says that:

“Average waiting times for each stage of the divorce process at Bury St Edmunds increased markedly last year, confirming many lawyers’ long-held fears about the centre’s ability to cope.”

The figures, obtained from HM Courts and Tribunals Service (‘HMCTS’), revealed that it took 373 days on average from the issue of a divorce petition to decree absolute in 2018, a 9% increase from 2017; that the eight-day wait for issuing a petition more than doubled in a year; and that the average time from the issuing of a petition to decree nisi increased 17%, to an average of 195 days.

HMCTS responded by saying that it had recently increased staff numbers at the centre, as a result of which performance had improved. A spokesman also pointed out that the new online divorce service is speeding up the application process significantly.

The eleven Divorce Centres were established in 2015, taking over the work of dealing with divorces from more than one hundred Divorce County Courts spread across the country. It has always been the worry of divorce lawyers that the centres would find it difficult to deal with the 100,000-plus divorces issued each year. And the position of Bury St Edmunds is the worst, as it covers London and the South-East, accounting for some 40% of all divorce petitions.

Whilst Family Law Cafe understands the need for rationalisation in these difficult economic times, longer divorces cause increased stress and suffering for people going through what is already one of the most difficult times in their lives. We hope therefore that the necessary resources are found to ensure that divorces are dealt with as quickly as possible, in all Divorce Centres.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Image: Delayed, by Jordlet, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The justice secretary, David Gauke, has confirmed that he will bring in legislation enacting no-fault divorce, in the next session of Parliament. The announcement brings this long-awaited reform a step closer to reality.

But exactly what is the new legislation likely to say? The detail has not of course yet been decided, but these are the Government’s proposals:

1. That the sole ground for divorce, i.e. that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, be retained.

2. That there no longer be any necessity to prove irretrievable breakdown, for example by showing that the other party has committed adultery or behaved unreasonably. Instead, it will just be necessary for one or both of the parties to file with the court a notice that the marriage has broken down irretrievably.

3. That the divorce still be a two-stage process (decree nisi and decree absolute), but that there be a minimum period of six months between the granting of a decree nisi and the granting of a decree absolute.

4. That the opportunity to contest the divorce be removed – there will be no more defended divorces.

5. That the current bar on issuing a divorce in the first year of marriage be retained.

It appears that the idea of no-fault divorce is generally supported. We suspect that the only one of these proposals that is likely to be subject to change is the third, with the ‘period for consideration of the decision to divorce’ possibly being altered.

Of course, all of the above depends on Parliament having time to pass the legislation. In particular, it would be seriously delayed (or worse) if its progress is interrupted by a general election.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image: Family Law Cafe

The Ministry of Justice’s consultation on reform of the legal requirements for divorce closed on Monday, the 10th of December.

Responders to the consultation have included The Law Society, the representative body for solicitors in England and Wales; The Bar Council, which represents barristers in England and Wales; Resolution, the association of family lawyers; and the Family Law Bar Association, the specialist Bar Association for the Family Bar in England and Wales.

The Ministry of Justice is now analysing the feedback to the consultation, and when that has been completed it will publish the outcome, setting out the responses to the consultation, and the government’s own response to them, including how the government proposes to reform the law on divorce. It is expected that the outcome will most likely be published in the Spring of next year.

Family Law Cafe awaits the outcome with great interest, and hopes that the government’s final proposals provide a workable system that achieves the consultation’s aim of reducing conflict on divorce. If they do, then we could at last have a divorce system fit for the twenty-first century.

You can read the Ministry of Justice’s consultation document here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Ministry of Justice, by morebyless, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Back in October last year we wrote about the divorce of Her Royal Highness Princess Tessy of Luxembourg and her husband His Royal Highness Prince Louis, and the financial remedies application that the Princess issued in the High Court in London. The final hearing of that application, before Mr Justice MacDonald, has now taken place.

The outcome of the application might seem quite mundane, given the exalted status of the parties. It is also notable that the Princess represented herself at the hearing, with the assistance of a McKenzie Friend. Mr Justice MacDonald dismissed the Princess’s application for a property transfer order with respect to the former matrimonial home in London, and made an order providing a licence for the Princess and the two children of the marriage to occupy the home, terminable on six months notice, a nominal spousal maintenance order, and a child maintenance order in the sum of £4,000 per year per child.

He concluded his judgment by referring to the allegations that we mentioned in our previous post that the Princess was simply a ‘gold digger’, saying that: “Nothing could be further from the truth.” He went on:

“In his statement for this final hearing, the husband states that “We married young and much has been expected from the applicant in her role as Princess. She undertook that role with grace and represented my family well, for which I am grateful to her.” At its heart, this is simply a sad case about a young couple who determined to marry for love despite the considerable challenges posed by the way in which history, tradition and chance had conspired to define their respective social status and to shape attitudes towards their marriage. It is a case about a couple who thereafter, for a time, were happy together, before the fairy tale soured.

“The fact that the wife chose in these circumstances to pursue financial remedies, as is her right in accordance with the law, does not act to equate her with those people who cynically form relationships with partners in order to obtain money or status. Although a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression, and whilst the point does not fall formally for me to determine, on the detailed evidence that has been available to me I take the view that the manner in which the wife has been traduced in some sections of the press by the use of that malign characterisation is both unfair and unwarranted.”

You can read Mr Justice MacDonald’s full judgment here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image of Prince Louis and Tessy Antony by Schnékert (Own work) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

This week is Good Divorce Week 2018, a campaign run by Resolution, the association of family lawyers and other professionals in England and Wales, who believe in a constructive, non-confrontational approach to family law matters.

Good Divorce Week is an annual campaign intended to promote a better way of getting divorced, minimising conflict between the parties and promoting the idea of settling disputes by agreement. This years’ campaign focuses on how separating or divorcing parents can limit the impact of conflict on their children, and also calls on the government to reform divorce law.

Resolution points out that its approach puts the best interests of children first, but says:

“However, although practitioners and parents are striving to limit the impact of conflict on children, the current fault-based divorce system has been shown to further exacerbate conflict. Two-thirds of our members have said that the current law makes it harder for separated parents to reach agreements.”

Family Law Cafe agrees. Family disputes should be resolved by agreement if at all possible. Minimising conflict makes agreement more likely, and most importantly reduces the chances of children being adversely affected when their parents separate. Doing away with the need to attribute blame for the breakdown of the marriage by introducing no-fault divorce removes an unnecessary cause of conflict.

If you want to find a lawyer who can help you try resolve a family dispute in a non-confrontational way Family Law Cafe can assist. To contact us, click the Contact link above and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image: Handshake, by Amtec Photos, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The tabloid newspapers are full of news stories to the effect that TV presenter Anthony McPartlin, better known as ‘Ant’ of Ant and Dec, and his wife Lisa Armstrong are divorcing today. Unfortunately, the stories are incorrect. What is happening today is that their decree nisi is being pronounced at the Central Family Court in London.

The stories represent one of the common misconceptions about divorce. Along with the myth of the ‘quickie’ divorce, also often reeled off by tabloids, the idea that the parties are divorced when a decree nisi is pronounced is often repeated.

But the parties are not divorced when the decree nisi is pronounced. The pronouncement simply means that the court is satisfied that the party who applied for the divorce (usually the petitioner) has proved that the marriage has broken down irretrievably, and is therefore entitled to the divorce after a further six weeks, unless during that time it is shown to the court that the divorce should not be finalised for some reason (the word ‘nisi’ means ‘unless’ in Latin).

After the six week period has elapsed, the party in whose favour the decree nisi was pronounced may apply for the decree absolute (if they don’t apply then the other party may apply after a further three months have elapsed), although often the decree absolute is not applied for until financial matters have been resolved. Only when the decree absolute has been made are the parties divorced, and therefore free to remarry.

There are two lessons to be learned from this story: firstly, don’t believe everything you read in the papers, and secondly, don’t expect to remarry until you have your decree absolute!

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Image of Anthony McPartlin by Ben Salter (From Flickr) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

In the last week statistics on divorce have been published by both the Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) and the Ministry of Justice (‘MoJ’). They paint a conflicting picture as to whether the divorce rate is going down or up.

The ONS’s statistics, for divorces in England and Wales in 2017, indicate that the divorce rate is falling. They show that in that year there were 8.4 divorces of opposite-sex couples per 1,000 married men and women aged 16 years and over, representing the lowest divorce rates since 1973, and a 5.6% decrease from 2016. This moved Nicola Haines, Vital Statistics Outputs Branch, Office for National Statistics, to comment:

“Divorce rates for opposite-sex couples in England and Wales are at their lowest level since 1973, which is around forty per cent lower than their peak in 1993.”

But she went on:

“However, among older people rates are actually higher in 2017 than in 1993 – perhaps due to the fact we have an increasingly ageing population and people are getting married later in life.”

Indeed, the statistics showed that the divorce rate for opposite-sex couples was highest among men aged 45 to 49 years and women aged 40 to 44 years.

Moving on to the MoJ’s statistics, which were for the Family Court for the quarter April to June 2018, these showed a significant increase in the number of divorce petitions issued in that period, up by 18% compared to same period in the previous year. There were 32,230 divorce petitions made during the period, which was the highest quarterly figure since the start of 2013, following a long period of stability around 28,000 petitions per quarter. the MoJ says that future quarters will be monitored to assess whether this a sustained change in trend.

So, is the divorce rate going down, or going up? Or maybe it has gone down and is now going up again? Perhaps we will have to wait for the next round of statistics to find out…

You can find the ONS’s statistics here, and the MoJ’s here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Ministry of Justice, by morebyless, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

As anticipated here last week, the Government has announced a consultation on the introduction of no-fault divorce.

Proposals detailed in the consultation include:

• retaining the sole ground for divorce: the irretrievable breakdown of a marriage
• removing the need to show evidence of the other spouse’s conduct, or a period of living apart
• introducing a new notification process where one, or possibly both parties, can notify the court of the intention to divorce
• removing the opportunity for the other spouse to contest the divorce application

The consultation also seeks views on the minimum time frame for the process between the interim decree of divorce (decree nisi) and final decree of divorce (decree absolute). This will allow couples time to reflect on the decision to divorce and to reach agreement on arrangements for the future where divorce is inevitable.

The announcement has been met with widespread approval, particularly amongst family lawyers, who are well aware of the unnecessary animosity caused by the need to attribute blame for the breakdown of the marriage under the present law.

However, there is still some way to go before we finally have a no-fault divorce system. As Nigel Shepherd, former Chair of Resolution and long-time campaigner for no-fault divorce, has said:

“It is now vital that the many individuals and organisations who have supported our call for change in recent months respond to the government consultation and get firmly behind this reform.”

If you would like to respond to the consultation, you can do so here. You can find the consultation document here. The consultation closes on the 10th of December.

We must keep up the pressure and ensure that this much-needed reform finally becomes law!

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Image: Roman marriage vows, by Ad Meskens [Attribution, CC BY-SA 3.0 or GFDL], from Wikimedia Commons.

It has been reported that the Lord Chancellor David Gauke is set to announce a consultation on no-fault divorce, in which he will call for the existing fault-based system of establishing marriage breakdown to be abolished.

Does this mean that we will at last be getting a no-fault divorce system, more than twenty years after the Government first tried to introduce it?

Well, we should not get too carried away. All that has been suggested is a consultation, and even that may not actually happen – see below. There is much to discuss in any consultation, including how long the divorce should take (the Government is apparently going to propose a minimum timeframe of six months), and getting a consensus may not be easy, and may take some time.

There have also been previous occasions when family law reforms have been recommended, but have never happened. For example, in 2007 the Law Commission recommended that cohabitees be given basic property rights, but that reform was never introduced.

Further to this, it has been suggested that the idea of the consultation has been purposely leaked, with a ‘Westminster source’ apparently saying that “not everyone will be in favour” and that “releasing the proposals now could be a way to test the water or even try to scupper them altogether”. It could therefore be that we will not get a consultation at all.

The Government did, however, indicate in the House of Lords last Thursday that the Lord Chancellor was sympathetic to the argument for reform of divorce.

Whatever, there is obviously still a long way to go before any reform of our divorce law happens, if it happens at all. Still, it is highly encouraging to see that the matter is on the Government agenda.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image of David Gauke: Chris McAndrew [CC BY 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons

At least two national newspapers have reported this week of a poll indicating that three in ten divorcing couples exaggerate faults in their marriage, in order to get a quicker divorce. This includes people exaggerating the ‘unreasonable behaviour’ of their spouse, and also lying both about adultery and about how long they have lived separately from their spouse.

The poll doesn’t really tell us anything new, but it comes hard on the heels of the Owens case, in which the Supreme Court confirmed that Tini Owens was not entitled to a divorce on the basis of her husband’s ‘unreasonable behaviour’. It is feared that the decision may lead to divorce petitions based upon behaviour having to include much stronger allegations in order to get a divorce, which could in turn increase animosity and make it less likely that divorcing couples will be able to agree arrangements over children and finances.

The Owens case led to an increase in calls for the introduction of a system of no-fault divorce, and the poll can only add to those calls.

But is it really necessary to exaggerate or lie, and what might happen if you do?

It is not yet clear whether the Owens case will actually make any difference to the way in which judges look at behaviour petitions. It may be that most judges will still take the pragmatic view that there is no point in the law prolonging an unhappy marriage. And there is always of course the possibility of waiting for two years’ separation if your spouse consents to the divorce, or five years’ separation if they do not. (For further details of the ground for divorce, see this post.)

But if you do lie to the court then there could be very serious consequences if you are found out, in addition to you being denied a divorce. In the course of the proceedings the person seeking a divorce will have to sign a statement of truth, confirming that everything they said in their divorce petition was true. At the end of the statement is this warning:

“Proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against a person who makes or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth.”

In fact, we think that making a false statement technically amounts to perjury, rather than contempt of court. Either way, the possible consequences are serious, including committal to prison. Obviously, we would always advise people against lying to the court, whether about adultery, the other party’s behaviour or how long they have lived apart, even if this means that they will not be able to get their divorce as quickly as they had hoped.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image: ‘Divorce‘, by Dallas, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The Supreme Court has today refused the appeal by Tini Owens against the refusal of the court to grant her a divorce.

Mrs Owens issued divorce proceedings on the basis that Mr Owens had behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him. However, Mr Owens denied that he had behaved unreasonably, and at a hearing in 2016 the judge refused the divorce, stating that Mrs Owens’ allegations were “of the kind to be expected in marriage”. Mrs Owens appealed, but the Court of Appeal upheld the original decision. Mrs Owens then appealed again, to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has today unanimously dismissed Mrs Owens’ appeal. Giving the leading judgment, Lord Wilson said that whilst the majority of the Supreme Court justices had concerns about the summary way in which the judge at the first hearing had considered Mrs Owens’ allegations against Mr Owens, the judge had applied the correct legal test and was entitled to reach the conclusions that he did. Accordingly, the appeal should be dismissed.

The majority did, however, invite Parliament to consider replacing “a law which denies to Mrs Owens any present entitlement to a divorce in the above circumstances.”

You can read the full Supreme Court judgment here.

Resolution, the family justice body, has called on the Government to urgently reform divorce law in England and Wales, in the light of the decision. Nigel Shepherd, Resolution’s past Chair and long-time campaigner for no-fault divorce, echoed this call for law makers to take action, saying:

“As an organisation who intervened in the case in support of Mrs Owens, we are disappointed at today’s judgment and what it means for her.

“Whilst the Supreme Court has, reluctantly, applied the law correctly, the fact that they have done so confirms there is now a divorce crisis in England and Wales, and the government needs to take urgent action to address it.

“In this day and age, it is outrageous that Mrs Owens – or anybody – is forced to remain trapped in a marriage, despite every judge involved in the case acknowledging it has come to an end in all but name. Today’s judgment underlines just how vital it is that government now urgently reforms the divorce law.

“It should not be for any husband or wife to ‘prove’ blame as the law requires many to do – this is archaic, creates needless conflict, and has to change.”

Family Law Cafe is also disappointed, though not surprised, by the decision. We, too, call upon the Government to urgently consider the introduction of a system of no-fault divorce.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe brings smart technology to complex family law issues, allowing customers to benefit from access to a friendly team of experts, assembled to the customer’s needs and budget.

Image of Courtroom 1 at the Supreme Court by Diliff [CC BY-SA 3.0 or GFDL], from Wikimedia Commons. (Yes, we know the judgment was handed down in Courtroom 2!)

As we have said here before: it’s the question to which anyone involved in divorce proceedings wants to know the answer: how long will it take?

The latest statistics published by the Ministry of Justice, for the period January to March 2018, indicate that divorces are now taking longer to process. The average time to the Decree Nisi is now 27 weeks from the date that the divorce petition was issued, up 3 weeks from the same period last year, and the average time to the Decree Absolute, which finalises the divorce, is now 51 weeks from the date of the petition, up 2 weeks from the same period last year. So a little longer than previously and, we suspect, rather longer than most people would imagine. These are, in fact, the highest figures since the current records began.

It should be pointed out that how long the divorce takes does not just depend upon how long the divorce centre takes to process it. In most cases it is not advisable to finalise the divorce until financial matters have been resolved. Obviously, it may take longer than 51 weeks to resolve those matters, and that will therefore mean that the divorce will take longer.

By the same token, it is quite possible to complete a divorce in considerably less than 51 weeks. One-third (33%) of divorce petitions issued between 1 January 2011 and 31 March 2018 reached Decree Nisi in the first quarter after the petition was issued, with just over a further third (38%) reaching that stage within the second quarter. Over half the petitions reached Decree Absolute within three quarters after the petition (1% in the first quarter, 35% within 1 to 2 quarters and 19% within 2 to 3 quarters).

You can read the statistics here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Time, by barbie.harris37, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

A study by researchers at the University of Arizona suggests that people who divorce have a greater likelihood of smoking and lower amounts of physical activity, which can lead to a wide range of poor health outcomes, including early death.

The study was based on data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, a long-term health study of adults over fifty living in England. The study includes seven sets of data, collected from participants every two years, beginning in 2002. The study found that those who were divorced or separated had a 46% greater risk of dying during the study than their counterparts who were still married.

As to the reasons for this, the findings showed that divorced or separated participants, especially women, reported lower life satisfaction than married participants. Lower life satisfaction, in turn, predicted lower levels of physical activity, which is linked to greater risk for early death. Divorced participants also were more likely than married participants to smoke and, as a result, had poorer lung function, which predicted early mortality.

It’s all pretty depressing, but the study, which is not the first to find that divorced people suffer worse health conditions, does suggest a better way for those whose marriages have broken down (incidentally, the study indicated that quality of life can actually improve for people who have ended relationships that are unhealthy for them).

Of course, a ‘good divorce’ cannot guarantee future good health. However, if the divorce is dealt with quickly and with as little stress as possible, and if you are satisfied with the outcome, then your chances of ‘recovery’ and higher life satisfaction thereafter are surely greatly improved.

Our approach to dealing with divorce and other family law issues is designed to make the process as quick and as stress-free as possible. We provide you with the support you need through the process, evaluate the possibility of resolving matters amicably, and work to ensure the best possible outcomes. For further information about how we can help you get a better divorce, click the Contact link above and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Image: Blood Pressure Monitor, by Medisave UK, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

As the dust settles following the excitement of the hearing of Mrs Owens’ appeal to the Supreme Court last week, we consider what the future holds for divorce law in this country.

The first question, of course, is: what will the Supreme Court decide? The Owens appeal relates to divorce petitions lodged on the basis that the respondent has behaved in such a way that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent. There are, of course, other ways to prove that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. However, they entail either adultery or a period of separation/desertion, which may not apply. Behaviour can be alleged in any case, and behaviour petitions are the most common – the decision of the Supreme Court is therefore of considerable importance.

Obviously, there are two options for the Supreme Court: to dismiss the appeal, or to allow it.  But what are the implications of each?

If the appeal is dismissed, then essentially nothing will change. Our current divorce law, as formulated by Parliament nearly fifty years ago, will continue to be interpreted in the same way as it has been since then. This means that if the petitioner has not proved to the court that the respondent’s behaviour is sufficiently unreasonable, then the court may refuse to grant the divorce.

If the appeal is allowed, then the law won’t change, but the way it is interpreted could change, with considerable implications for future divorces. It was argued on behalf of Mrs Owens that the correct legal test should be whether the petitioner found the respondent’s behaviour to be so unreasonable that she could not be expected to live with him. If the Supreme Court accepts this then, as Mr Owens’ lawyers pointed out, this could effective mean that we have a system of ‘divorce on demand’, whereby any petitioner could simply set out allegations of the respondent’s behaviour, and declare that they found that behaviour so unreasonable that they could not be expected to live with the respondent.

We will have to wait to see what the Supreme Court decides.

Looking further forward, however, will Parliament finally grasp the nettle and reform the law? The calls for the introduction of a system of no-fault divorce are getting ever louder, and the Owens case, in which the law has forced a woman to remain in a marriage that even the court accepted had broken down, does suggest that the time has come for change, irrespective of what the Supreme Court may decide.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image: ‘Divorce‘, by Billie Grace Ward, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Lady Hale, the President of the Supreme Court, has proposed that there be an online ‘one stop shop’ to deal with all aspects of divorce cases.

In a speech given to the annual conference of Resolution, the association of family lawyers, Lady Hale said that under the current system it can then take a long time to sort out the practical
consequences of divorce, including the arrangements for property, finance and above all children. This, she said, was made worse by the “fragmentation of procedures, so that each issue is dealt with separately, with different pieces of paper and often before different judges. One family may have to engage in (i) applications for short term arrangements about the matrimonial home or domestic abuse; (ii) the divorce petition; (iii) financial remedies proceedings; (iv) proceedings about the arrangements for the children; and (v) child support ‘proceedings’.”

The answer, she proposed, would be:

“…to introduce a one stop shop in family cases – where instead of having to navigate possibly five different processes a separating party could file one form telling one story and asking for whichever relief they wanted at the time – and preferably available on-line.”

Family Law Cafe welcomes Lady Hale’s proposal, especially that it should be possible for all aspects of a divorce to be dealt with together, rather than separately. Such a system would be simpler and easier to use for all, especially those without the benefit of legal assistance.

You can read Lady Hale’s full speech here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe brings smart technology to complex family law issues, allowing customers to benefit from access to a friendly team of experts, assembled to the customer’s needs and budget.

Image of Lady Hale reproduced from the Supreme Court website, Crown copyright, licensed under the Open Government Licence.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (‘HMCTS’) and the Ministry of Justice (‘MoJ’) have announced that a fully online divorce application process is being tested across England and Wales for the first time.

Launched last year, the pilot initially allowed people seeking a divorce to use an online system which offers prompts and guidance to assist them in completing their application. They would then print off the form and send it to the court. This month HMCTS has extended the service so that the application is now fully digital – submitting the form, sending the relevant documents, and payment.

HMCTS and the MoJ say that 130 online applications were received in the first week, and that the online system has “drastically cut the number of applications being returned because of errors – showing a 90% improvement from paper forms.” They say that it has “already gained positive feedback from people welcoming the simplified, streamlined and easy to understand system which delivers their application instantly – without the worry of it being lost in the post.”

The next stages of the pilot will include making the system available for use by legal representatives.

Susan Acland-Hood, CEO of HMCTS, said:

“We are investing over £1 billion to reform and modernise the justice system. These measures are drastically cutting the number of applications returned because of errors – streamlining the process and ensuring we are best supporting people going through a difficult and often painful time.”

Nigel Shepherd, Chair of Resolution, the association of family lawyers, commented:

“Resolution welcomes the move to a fully digital system, bringing divorce in line with many other government services which have been digitised for some time now. Although the consequences of divorce, such as making arrangements for how parents will care for their children and sorting out the finances, can be complicated, the divorce itself is usually a relatively simple administrative process. Moving is online is a step in the right direction, provided it functions well for the couples, their legal representatives where they have them and anyone else involved. We hope to see positive results from this pilot.”

Family Law Café says: Whilst these are obviously early days, it is good to see that the public appears to be happy with the new system. However, it is no surprise that they like the convenience that an online system provides. That is why we offer our clients a secure online portal to their case file, that they can access whenever and wherever they wish.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image:  Andrew_Writer, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Last week the Daily Mail reported that singer and actress Billie Piper and her ex-husband Laurence Fox were granted a ‘quickie’ divorce in the High Court in London in 2016. The hearing was said to have lasted just fifty seconds.

As we have explained here previously, there is no such thing as a ‘quickie’ divorce. There is only one divorce procedure, and it applies to everyone, including celebrities. Despite this, the myth of the ‘quickie’ divorce persists in popular culture, particularly in the media.

Where a divorce is undefended, as in this case, the pronouncement of the decree nisi is simply read out by the judge. Such a pronouncement will usually only take a matter of seconds. However, the procedure that the divorce has to follow is the same for all uncontested divorces, and usually takes several months.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image of Billie Piper by Florida Supercon from Ft. Lauderdale, USA (MCCC_00790) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons.

Last week media personality, journalist and broadcaster Janet Street-Porter admitted that she lied to the court in order to get a quicker divorce.

Speaking on ITV’s Loose Women programme about the current divorce system, which requires one party to prove the other was at fault for the breakdown of the marriage unless the parties have been separated for at least two years, Ms Street-Porter said that she had lied to the court about the reasons for the breakdown of her marriage, as she wanted to get divorced and could not wait two years. She said:

“It’s a ridiculous system as it means all over the country people are lying because they want to get divorced in less than two years and if one of you doesn’t agree to get divorced after two years, you’ve got to stay together for five years, which is even more ridiculous.”

Her comments were made on the day after the Nuffield Foundation published a report saying that the current divorce system causes unnecessary conflict. The report recommended the introduction of a system of no-fault divorce.

Ms Street-Porter’s comments merely confirm what we already know: that the current divorce system is being abused by parties and judges alike. Parties are ‘manufacturing’ or exaggerating allegations of unreasonable behaviour or adultery, so that they don’t have to wait until they have separated for two years before getting a divorce, and judges are allowing divorce petitions through without question, as they understand that the marriage is over if that’s what one party wants. The law is being brought into disrepute, and the sooner we have a proper no-fault divorce system the better.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image of Janet Street-Porter by Jem Stone, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

New research published today by the Nuffield Foundation shows that divorce law in England and Wales is incentivising people to exaggerate claims of ‘behaviour’ or adultery to get a quicker divorce. In practice, says the report, these claims cannot be investigated by the court or easily rebutted by the responding party, leading to unnecessary conflict and a system that is inherently unfair.

Divorce affects more than 100,000 families in England and Wales every year. If separating couples want to get divorced without waiting for two years (or five if the other person does not consent, as with the recent case of Owens vs Owens), one person must submit a petition detailing how the other is at ‘fault’. In 2015, 60% of English and Welsh divorces were granted on adultery or behaviour. In Scotland, where a divorce can be obtained after one year if both parties agree, this figure was 6%.

The research, led by Professor Liz Trinder at the University of Exeter and funded by the Nuffield Foundation, is the first empirical study since the 1980s of how the divorce law in England and Wales is operating. The researchers recommend removing fault entirely from the divorce law and replacing it with a notification system where divorce would be available if one or both parties register that the marriage has broken down irretrievably and that intention is confirmed by one or both parties after a minimum period of six months.

Commenting upon the report Nigel Shepherd, Chair of the family justice campaign group Resolution, said:

“This authoritative, academic research should eliminate any doubt from government that the law needs to change. Fault-based divorces don’t reflect the reality of relationship breakdown for the majority of couples and do nothing to help them deal constructively with the consequences – indeed they often have the adverse effect of inciting additional conflict between separating partners.

“It’s time to make no-fault the default.”

Family Law Cafe agrees wholeheartedly.

The report is here, and a summary can be found here.

*          *          *

Familylawcafe.co.uk has been set up to provide intelligent process through the maze of family law and to make matters move at a speed and in the way that is right for you, helping give you control of the process.

A Tory MP has warned that data logs from autonomous, or ‘driverless’, cars could be used by ‘ambitious’ divorce lawyers to prove adultery.

In the House of Commons former minister Sir Greg Knight asked the Minister of State for Transport John Hayes whether he had had any further thoughts on the data log of automated vehicles, how long such information ought to be kept for and who should have access to it. He went on:

“Quite clearly, we are all expecting that insurance companies would have the right to access the data log, and also the police, because even if there’s been no accident, the vehicle might have been involved in a crime.

“But will others be able to seek access to this data log, such as, for example, an employer trying to see what the employee has been up to during the day.

“Or perhaps an ambitious divorce lawyer, seeking to prove adultery has taken place and trying to find out where the occupant of the automated vehicle went during the afternoon.”

The Minister, whilst not wishing to enter into “salacious matters”, accepted that the issue of access to the data needed to be looked at closely.

A similar concern was raised in America a few years back relating to data collected by an electronic road toll collection system.

But could such data really be used to prove adultery? The simple answer is “no”. As we have explained previously, ‘adultery’ means voluntary sexual intercourse between a man and a woman who are not married to one another but where at least one of them is a married person. The mere fact that a married person may have spent time with an unmarried person does not prove that they committed adultery. However, it may well indicate that the married person was having a relationship with someone else, which could amount to unreasonable behaviour, although in such cases the party issuing the divorce is likely to have other evidence of unreasonable behaviour, such that they will not need to prove where their spouse went on any given afternoon.

In short, Family Law Cafe does not envisage driverless car data logs being routinely used by divorce lawyers, ambitious or otherwise, to prove adultery.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image of driverless car by Automobile Italia, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) has today published statistics for the number of divorces in England and Wales in 2016.

The main points are :

• There were 106,959 divorces of opposite-sex couples in 2016, an increase of 5.8% compared with 2015.

• There were 112 divorces of same-sex couples in 2016; of these 78% were among female couples.

• In 2016, there were 8.9 divorces of opposite-sex couples per 1,000 married men and women aged 16 and over (divorce rates), an increase of 4.7% since 2015; however, divorce rates in 2016 are over 20% lower than the recent peak in divorce rate in 2003 and 2004.

• The divorce rate for opposite-sex couples was highest among men aged 45 to 49 and women in their thirties (ages 30 to 39).

Nicola Haines of the Vital Statistics Outputs Branch at the ONS commented: “Although the number of divorces of opposite-sex couples in England and Wales increased by 5.8% in 2016 compared with 2015, the number remains 30% lower than the most recent peak in 2003; divorce rates for men and women have seen similar changes. This is the second year that divorces among same-sex couples have been possible since the introduction of marriages of same-sex couples in March 2014. Our latest marriage figures show that of the 4,850 marriages formed between same-sex couples in 2014, 56% were female couples. In 2016, there were 112 divorces among same-sex couples, with female couples accounting for 78% of these.”

Commenting on the rise, Nigel Shepherd, Chair of the family justice campaign group Resolution, said:

“Although the numbers of divorces, and the divorce rate, are up on 2015, both are still far lower than their recent peak of 2003. As the ONS recognises, this is almost certainly due, in part, to the rise in the number of cohabiting couples – the fastest growing family type in the UK.

“Yet despite this, there is still little or no legal protection for cohabitants should they separate. What’s more, many are living together while still believing there is such a thing as common-law marriage in this country and that as a result they have rights – there isn’t and they don’t. Action needs to be taken to change this.

“It’s also important to recognise that behind these statistics, there are tens of thousands of couples who are currently discouraged by the current system from taking a non-confrontational approach to divorce. For many separating couples, the need to apportion blame on the divorce petition can introduce unnecessary conflict, which adds to the stress and heartache for the couple themselves and, crucially, any children they may have.

“For decades, ‘unreasonable behaviour’ has been the most common reason for divorce among opposite-sex couples, yet many are forced into playing this ‘blame game’ by our archaic divorce laws.

“That’s why we have repeatedly called on government to legislate for no-fault divorce, and will continue to do so.”

Family Law Cafe agrees. Whilst the figures may not be as high as they once were, they show that a very large number of people still go through divorce every year. They also show that the vast majority of opposite-sex divorces are on the basis of adultery or unreasonable behaviour. It is time that all of those couples should be able to divorce without having to attribute blame for the breakdown of their marriages.

The full ONS statistical bulletin can be found here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe brings smart technology to complex family law issues, allowing customers to benefit from access to a friendly team of experts, assembled to the customer’s needs and budget.

Image: Office for National Statistics, licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

It’s a question asked by most people contemplating or going through divorce: how long will it take? New figures published by the Ministry of Justice provide an answer.

As we have explained before, a divorce takes place in two stages: from the issue of the divorce petition up to decree nisi and from decree nisi to decree absolute, when the divorce is finalised. At least six weeks must elapse between decree nisi and decree absolute, although in practice it often takes considerably longer, as parties usually wait until all financial matters have been resolved before applying for the decree absolute.

The new figures come in the latest Family Court Statistics Quarterly, for the period April to June 2017. The statistics show that during that period the average time from the date of the petition to the date of the decree nisi was 23.3 weeks, while the average time from the petition to the decree absolute was 48.2 weeks.

On a longer timescale, from January 2011 to June 2017, 34% of petitions issued reached decree nisi in the first quarter after the petition was issued and 37% reached that stage in the second quarter. Over half the petitions reached decree absolute within three quarters after the petition was issued.

These figures give an indication of how long your divorce may take. Of course, how long it will actually take will depend upon how quickly the parties and the court deal with it and, if relevant, how long it takes to sort out financial matters.

You can find the full family court statistics quarterly here.

• *          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image: time, by new 1lluminati, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

It has been reported that the marriage of celebrity couple Louise and Jamie Redknapp has broken down, and that Louise is seeking a ‘quickie’ divorce. We do not know if it is true that she wants a divorce, but we do know that there is no such thing as a ‘quickie’ divorce.

The term ‘quickie divorce’ appears regularly in the popular media, but it is a myth. It suggests that there is a separate, faster, procedure that some couples can use to get divorced. In fact, there is only one divorce procedure, and it applies to everyone, including celebrities.

The time that a divorce takes to go through depends upon a number of factors, in particular whether the other party decides to defend it. Defended divorces are likely to take much longer than undefended divorces, particularly if they go all the way to a contested hearing.

Another factor affecting the length of a divorce is whether or not there are contested financial matters involved – in most cases the divorce will not be finalised until those matters have been dealt with.

These factors can have an enormous bearing on how long a divorce takes. Whereas an undefended divorce with no contested financial matters can be completed within a few months, a contested divorce, or a divorce with contested financial matters, can even take several years.

In short, if you want a quick divorce, try to agree all matters beforehand.

Familylawcafe.co.uk has been set up to provide intelligent process through the maze of family law and to make matters move at a speed and in the way that is right for you, helping give you control of the process.

Image: Louise Redknapp at the BAFTA’s, by Damien Everett, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

It is quite common for someone whose marriage has broken down to want to issue divorce proceedings before their spouse, but is there any advantage in ‘getting in first’?

Perhaps the most common reason for wanting to be the first to issue divorce proceedings is the desire to blame the other party for the breakdown of the marriage. If you get in first with your petition alleging that your spouse has committed adultery or that they have behaved unreasonably, then that firmly places the blame on them, and also gives you an advantage when it comes to sorting out finances and arrangements for any children. Or does it?

In fact, subject to one point mentioned below, the courts are not interested in ‘the blame game’. Save in cases of exceptionally bad behaviour (as explained in this post), the court is not concerned with the reasons for the breakdown of the marriage. All that matters is that it has broken down. The reasons for the breakdown will generally have little or no bearing upon the financial settlement and the arrangements for children.

The only area where the courts are – unfortunately – interested in who has divorced who is the issue of costs. As a generalisation, the courts will order the party ‘at fault’ (if there is one, i.e. where the divorce is based upon adultery or unreasonable behaviour) to pay the costs of the divorce. However, the respondent to the divorce may try to avoid paying costs by defending the divorce and cross-petitioning, alleging that the breakdown of the marriage was the fault of the petitioner. This will, of course, make the divorce more complicated, and increase the costs.

Rather than getting bogged down in contested and expensive divorce proceedings that will not benefit either party, it is far better to try to agree in advance who will divorce who, on what basis, and who will pay the costs.

So, if you think that your spouse may be about to issue divorce proceedings, take some advice before rushing off to the court just so that you can get in first.

Image: Starting blocks, by Joakim Karlsson, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Tini Owens, the wife who lost her appeal against the refusal of the court to grant her a divorce, has been granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

In March the Court of Appeal decided not to allow Mrs Owens to divorce her husband because his behaviour, as found in the lower courts, was not considered ‘unreasonable’. Mrs Owens’ legal team will argue that the Courts’ emphasis on trying to find that a Respondent’s behaviour is in some way “unreasonable” is wrong. It will be argued that this is a “linguistic trap”, and that the statute does not require unreasonable behaviour, but simply behaviour such that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.

Commenting on today’s decision, Nigel Shepherd, National Chair of Resolution said:

“Resolution supported Mrs Owen’s application to appeal so welcome the Supreme Court’s decision to hear her case which has significant implications for the future of divorce law in England and Wales.

“In today’s modern society, it should not be the case that someone is being forced to stay in a marriage she does not want to be part of, and is now having to go to the highest court.

“Mrs Owens’ case highlights why divorce law in the UK needs to change. We need to reduce conflict and support separating couples to resolve matters amicably, rather than forcing them to play a blame game where one or both of them thinks the marriage is over. The simple fact is that this case should not have been necessary, and only by implementing a no-fault divorce system can we ensure such a situation doesn’t happen again.

“Support for no-fault divorce is growing, from family law professionals, the public and politicians. Whether it’s before or after the case is heard by the Supreme Court, the Government needs to take urgent action to bring our outdated divorce laws up to date and ensure that Mrs Owens’ experience is not repeated.”

Image: UK Supreme Court, by Alex F, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

It is not uncommon for a woman to want to change her surname after divorce. She may wish to revert to her maiden name, or change it to something completely different. She may also wish to change her children’s names. So, what is involved?

Technically, your name is simply what you want others to call you, so all you need to do is ask people to call you by whatever name you wish. However, certain organisations, such as banks and the Passport Office may require written proof of the change of name, and for this you will usually need to have a change of name deed drawn up. A solicitor can prepare the deed, and provide you with certified copies which you can use to notify those organisations of the name change.

Having changed their own surname, or having remarried, many mothers then wish to change the surname of their children. However, changing children’s names after divorce is not so straightforward. You will not be able to take any step to change a child’s name without either the consent of everyone with parental responsibility (usually the father), or a court order. Courts do not normally agree to ‘cutting off’ the father in this way, unless there is a very good reason – the mother remarrying is not, on its own, a good reason.

If the mother does get the father’s consent, then she may still need a change of name deed drawn up. This is similar to a change of name deed for herself, only she signs the deed on behalf of the child. Again, certified copies of the signed deed will be used as proof of the child’s name change.

If the father does not consent and the mother wants to apply for a court order giving her permission to change the child’s name, then she should first consult a specialist family lawyer, who will be able to advise her whether the court is likely to agree to the name change. Family Law Cafe can help you find a specialist family lawyer and strategise what needs to be done, in the most cost-effective way.

Image: Signature, by Sebastien Wiertz, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Tini Owens, the wife who lost her appeal against the refusal of the court to grant her a divorce, has applied for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Last month the Court of Appeal dismissed Mrs Owens’ appeal, upholding the original ruling of the court that she had failed to prove, within the meaning of the law, that her husband had behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him. The decision means that Mrs Owens is locked into a loveless marriage, despite the fact that the court accepted that the marriage had broken down.

Mrs Owens has now lodged an application for permission to appeal with the Supreme Court. She will only be able to proceed with the appeal if permission is granted.

Permission to appeal is only granted for applications that, in the opinion of the Supreme Court Justices, raise an arguable point of law of general public importance which ought to be considered by the Supreme Court, bearing in mind that the matter has already been the subject of judicial decision and has already been reviewed on appeal.

Mrs Owens’ barrister Philip Marshall QC has expressed the hope that the Supreme Court find a workable solution to the present unsatisfactory state of the divorce law “which is both intellectually honest and better reflects modern thinking and social attitudes”. Family Law Cafe agrees, although the best solution would be for Parliament to enact a system of no-fault divorce so that it is no longer necessary in any cases to attribute blame for the breakdown of the marriage.

For further information on the ground for divorce, see this post.

Image: UK Supreme Court, by Alex F, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Interim findings from the first major research study on divorce law since the 1980s have been published. The research project, Finding Fault, which is led by Professor Liz Trinder of Exeter University, aims to explore how the current law on the ground for divorce and civil partnership dissolution operates in practice and to inform debate about whether and how the law might be reformed. Following the Court of Appeal judgment in the Owens case, the research highlights the need for reform of divorce law in England and Wales.

The key interim findings of the research were as follows:

• The majority of divorces are based on ‘fault’, i.e. blaming one spouse for the marriage breakdown.

• Using fault (adultery or behaviour) means the divorce can take as little as 3 months, instead of a wait of at least 2 years.

• Divorce petitions are not necessarily accurate records of who or what caused the breakdown of the marriage. Petitions can be based on compromise statements (a ‘fudge’) designed to minimise conflict and upset, or can be just one person’s view of what went wrong with the marriage.

• The court cannot test whether allegations are true or not and petitions are taken at face value. ‘Rebuttals’ written on the form by respondents are ignored unless the respondent files a formal ‘Answer’ (with £245 fee) to defend the petition.

• The threshold for behaviour petitions appears to be lower than 30 years ago. Very few petitions appear to be rejected on substantive legal grounds, whether ‘true’ or not.

• Fault can create or exacerbate conflict. This can affect negotiations about children or finances where the law expects parties to work together.

• In reality, there is already divorce by consent or ‘on demand’, but masked by an often painful and sometimes destructive legal ritual.

• So far, there is no evidence from this study that the current law does protect marriage.

• Reform of the divorce law is long overdue. A single system of notification of intent to divorce would be clearer, more honest and neutral between petitioner and respondent.

Family Law Cafe agrees that reform of divorce law is long overdue. We hope that this research, along with the Owens case, will encourage the government to take action to bring in a system of divorce that does not require the attribution of fault in any cases.

Image: Exeter University campus, by Barry W., licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Tini Owens, the wife who was appealing against the refusal of the court to grant her a divorce, has lost her appeal.

In a judgment handed down today the Court of Appeal upheld the original ruling of the court that, despite the fact that the marriage had broken down, Mrs Owens had failed to prove, within the meaning of the law, that her husband had behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

The ruling means that, in her own words, Mrs Owens is “locked into a loveless and desperately unhappy marriage”.

Whilst accepting that the law had been applied correctly, two of the Court of Appeal judges expressed their dissatisfaction with the result. Lady Justice Hallett said: “I very much regret that our decision will leave the wife in a very unhappy situation. I urge the husband to reconsider his position. On any view, the marriage is over. I can only hope that he will relent and consent to a divorce on the grounds the parties have lived apart for a continuous period of two years, rather than force his wife to wait until five years have elapsed.”

Commenting on the judgment Nigel Shepherd, the Chair of Resolution, the association of family lawyers, said: “This judgment will obviously come as a disappointment to Mrs Owens, and absolutely underlines the urgent need for no-fault divorce. Nobody should be compelled to remain in a marriage against their will, yet judges’ hands are tied by the current divorce law … The simple fact is, this case should not have been necessary. Only by implementing a no-fault divorce system can we ensure such a situation doesn’t happen again.”

The Court of Appeal’s judgment can be read in full here.

For further information on the ground for divorce, see this post.

Image: Prison Bars, by Michael Coghlan, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

We have seen that adultery is one of the ways of proving that a marriage has irretrievably broken down for the purpose of divorce proceedings, but what is adultery, and how do you prove it?

‘Adultery’ means voluntary sexual intercourse between a man and a woman who are not married to one another, but at least one of them is a married person. Note in particular that it does not just mean having a relationship with another person, although that may well amount to unreasonable behaviour. Note also that a sexual relationship between two persons of the same sex cannot be adultery for the purposes of divorce.

The party taking divorce proceedings (the ‘petitioner’) must prove both that other party (the ‘respondent’) has committed adultery and that they find it intolerable to live with the respondent, although the court does not normally enquire into the latter, accepting the petitioner’s statement in the petition that they find it intolerable to live with the respondent.

Adultery is normally proved by an admission from the respondent, but may also be proved, for example, by evidence that the respondent has parented a child of which the petitioner is not the other parent, or by a finding in other court proceedings, such as a decree in previous judicial separation proceedings, granted by reference to the respondent’s adultery.

Simply living with another person is not proof of adultery with that person, but may amount to circumstantial evidence of adultery.

If you can only prove the adultery by an admission from the respondent, then obviously you will need to obtain the admission (preferably in writing) before starting the divorce proceedings. If the respondent is not prepared to admit the adultery then, as indicated above, the fact that they have formed a relationship with another person may amount to unreasonable behaviour.

You are not entitled to rely on adultery committed by the respondent if, after it became known to you that the respondent had committed that adultery, you and the respondent have lived with each other for a period exceeding, or periods together exceeding, six months.

You do not have to name the person with whom the respondent committed adultery (the ‘co-respondent’), and it is generally best not to do so, unless you want to ask the court to order the co-respondent to pay your costs.

If you require further information regarding divorce, Family Law Café can help. To contact us click the Contact link above and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

Image: Christ and the Woman Taken in Adultery, by Giovanni Domenico Tiepolo.