FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Refused a divorce
Refused a divorce
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/24/tini-owens-trapped-loveless-marriage-judges-refuse-divorce
Tini Owens has been married for 40 years but has been refused a divorce as it was deemed the marriage has not irretrievably broken down because her husband doesn't want a divorce. She had an affair and says that she has put up with his unreasonable behaviour for years.
What do you think about this story and the fact we do not have a no fault divorce available in this country?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Surely the "fault" was hers....and so it would need to be him that sought the divorce.
We do have "no fault divorces" but these (as far as I know) need to be mutually agreed? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"Surely the "fault" was hers....and so it would need to be him that sought the divorce.
We do have "no fault divorces" but these (as far as I know) need to be mutually agreed?"
You can mutually agree that it's irretrievably broken down or separate for 5 years, or, as you say suggest him filing citing her affair as the fault.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *elson61Man
over a year ago
WELWYN GARDEN CITY |
I was quite surprised by the outcome of this case,especially from personal experience seeing what is presented to courts as unreasonable behaviour and what is often accepted. For example, when I divorced back in the late 90's, my ex listed my apparent refusal to open a joint bank account as unreasonable behaviour! I have heard other anecdotal stories over the years where the behaviour appears trivial and a divorce has been granted. Was it the case in this divorce that the husband contested it and didn't want to divorce that swayed it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yldstyleWoman
over a year ago
A world of my own |
I've not read the link so can't comment on that story. However when I got divorced my husband didn't want to. Despite the fact I had an affair because we were both so miserable. In the end he finally agreed. At the time I was earning far more money than him and we were lucky not to be tied into a property. I wrote my husband a list of my unreasonable behaviors and he agreed to petition the divorce.. he got legal aid as he wasn't working. I represented myself and within 9 weeks it was complete. It took me two years to finally get him to agree to it though.
I think the system is outdated and that if someone wants out they want out and the waiting period often does more harm than good |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"I was quite surprised by the outcome of this case,especially from personal experience seeing what is presented to courts as unreasonable behaviour and what is often accepted. For example, when I divorced back in the late 90's, my ex listed my apparent refusal to open a joint bank account as unreasonable behaviour! I have heard other anecdotal stories over the years where the behaviour appears trivial and a divorce has been granted. Was it the case in this divorce that the husband contested it and didn't want to divorce that swayed it?"
Probably. The fact that the appeal court upheld the original ruling on the basis of law suggests that.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"I've not read the link so can't comment on that story. However when I got divorced my husband didn't want to. Despite the fact I had an affair because we were both so miserable. In the end he finally agreed. At the time I was earning far more money than him and we were lucky not to be tied into a property. I wrote my husband a list of my unreasonable behaviors and he agreed to petition the divorce.. he got legal aid as he wasn't working. I represented myself and within 9 weeks it was complete. It took me two years to finally get him to agree to it though.
I think the system is outdated and that if someone wants out they want out and the waiting period often does more harm than good"
In this case the wife had an affair but cannot get the husband to see it as a reason for divorce.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"she could just not live with him?
if he dies within 5 yrs she inherits all his shit too.
I think if he dies anytime soon she might be in trouble. (That was posted in mild jest.)"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oxy_minxWoman
over a year ago
Scotland - Aberdeen |
This story was printed months ago and personally I think it was an outdated judge that over rode their case, I think he was simply in the wrong for refusing it! What's the point if one party wants out?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"she could just not live with him?
if he dies within 5 yrs she inherits all his shit too.
I think if he dies anytime soon she might be in trouble. (That was posted in mild jest.)"
my first thought was to kill him tbh, then this other idea seemed more legal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"I'll have a read and come back to you.
Off the top of my head though I do think the divorce law needs updating."
I've heard it on every R4 news bulletin today but have only just had the time to read the news reports.
I feel very sorry for both of them.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"she could just not live with him?
if he dies within 5 yrs she inherits all his shit too.
I think if he dies anytime soon she might be in trouble. (That was posted in mild jest.)
my first thought was to kill him tbh, then this other idea seemed more legal."
Separation and waiting is DEFINITELY more legal than murder.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"she could just not live with him?
if he dies within 5 yrs she inherits all his shit too.
I think if he dies anytime soon she might be in trouble. (That was posted in mild jest.)
my first thought was to kill him tbh, then this other idea seemed more legal.
Separation and waiting is DEFINITELY more legal than murder. "
i may have committed a forum faux pas by admitting my first thought is to kill men.
*backs out the topic, hoping no men noticed* |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"She must have had very poor examples of his unreasonable behaviour then."
She described the marriage as loveless. The judge who refused her original petition described her examples of unreasonable behaviour as 'those that can be expected in a marriage'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *elson61Man
over a year ago
WELWYN GARDEN CITY |
"She must have had very poor examples of his unreasonable behaviour then.
She described the marriage as loveless. The judge who refused her original petition described her examples of unreasonable behaviour as 'those that can be expected in a marriage'."
I think it would have gone through if her husband had not contested, but it's clear his refusal to accept the marriage was over was a major consideration for the judges. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"She must have had very poor examples of his unreasonable behaviour then.
She described the marriage as loveless. The judge who refused her original petition described her examples of unreasonable behaviour as 'those that can be expected in a marriage'.
I think it would have gone through if her husband had not contested, but it's clear his refusal to accept the marriage was over was a major consideration for the judges."
I disagree. If her grounds were good enough, she would have got the divorce regardless of whether he contested it or not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
She was divorcing him but the court ruled that his behaviour was not unreasonable enough for the marriage to count as having irretrievably broken down.
She can separate from him for 5 years and then divorce him.
Its all quite well defined. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/24/tini-owens-trapped-loveless-marriage-judges-refuse-divorce
Tini Owens has been married for 40 years but has been refused a divorce as it was deemed the marriage has not irretrievably broken down because her husband doesn't want a divorce. She had an affair and says that she has put up with his unreasonable behaviour for years.
What do you think about this story and the fact we do not have a no fault divorce available in this country?
"
Beyond awful. I cannot believe this woman is being held hostage in her relationship. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just leave then you can claim desertion
No you can't 
Desertion is grounds for divorce.  "
You can't leave and claim desertion. I know the grounds for getting a divorce. I've worked in a court for over 25 years.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icketysplits OP Woman
over a year ago
Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound |
"Just leave then you can claim desertion
No you can't
Desertion is grounds for divorce.
You can't leave and claim desertion. I know the grounds for getting a divorce. I've worked in a court for over 25 years.
"
Ah, you were commenting on the leave part. He would have to claim desertion if she left.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just leave then you can claim desertion
No you can't
Desertion is grounds for divorce.
You can't leave and claim desertion. I know the grounds for getting a divorce. I've worked in a court for over 25 years.
Ah, you were commenting on the leave part. He would have to claim desertion if she left.
"
Yes  It's very rarely used as a ground in my experience. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/24/tini-owens-trapped-loveless-marriage-judges-refuse-divorce
Tini Owens has been married for 40 years but has been refused a divorce as it was deemed the marriage has not irretrievably broken down because her husband doesn't want a divorce. She had an affair and says that she has put up with his unreasonable behaviour for years.
What do you think about this story and the fact we do not have a no fault divorce available in this country?
Beyond awful. I cannot believe this woman is being held hostage in her relationship."
It does seem like she has been ordered to stay married.Almost as though she had been sentenced. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"She was divorcing him but the court ruled that his behaviour was not unreasonable enough for the marriage to count as having irretrievably broken down.
She can separate from him for 5 years and then divorce him.
Its all quite well defined."
This was basically what happened with me. Because I didnt contest or agree to the divorce, the judge read her statement of unreasonable behaviour. Said it was not strong enough reasons to end a 10 year marriage, and suggested counselling and threw it out. We then divorced as a 5 year seperation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"She was divorcing him but the court ruled that his behaviour was not unreasonable enough for the marriage to count as having irretrievably broken down.
She can separate from him for 5 years and then divorce him.
Its all quite well defined.
This was basically what happened with me. Because I didnt contest or agree to the divorce, the judge read her statement of unreasonable behaviour. Said it was not strong enough reasons to end a 10 year marriage, and suggested counselling and threw it out. We then divorced as a 5 year seperation. "
Did you not want a divorce then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"She must have had very poor examples of his unreasonable behaviour then.
She described the marriage as loveless. The judge who refused her original petition described her examples of unreasonable behaviour as 'those that can be expected in a marriage'.
I think it would have gone through if her husband had not contested, but it's clear his refusal to accept the marriage was over was a major consideration for the judges.
I disagree. If her grounds were good enough, she would have got the divorce regardless of whether he contested it or not. "
I have never been married but u find it incredulous that you have to prove why you no longer want to be married to someone and that someone else with no knowledge of them or the relationship gets to decide if they can or cannot live with the said 'behaviours' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since."
No, it *does* matter.
Because while she remains married a contract exists. They are a partnership in the eyes of the law (yet the law won't allow them to dissolve).
Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since.
No, it *does* matter.
Because while she remains married a contract exists. They are a partnership in the eyes of the law (yet the law won't allow them to dissolve).
Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate."
Takes about 2 weeks to legally change your name by deed poll.
Many forget that marriage is a legal and binding contract with the government, primarily for tax law. It was hijacked by the church as back when it started just about the only people that could write were the clergy, and they saw it as a good earner.
Scottish law changed, wording is the same but the times got reduced to 1 year by agreement, or 2 years if contested. London was supposed to do the same but got distracted. I suspect this case is more about putting that back on parliaments inbox than any actual real problem.
To get through the courts system has probably already taken more than 1 of the 3 years needed, and this particular couple will be past the 5 years long before any laws get changed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since.
No, it *does* matter.
Because while she remains married a contract exists. They are a partnership in the eyes of the law (yet the law won't allow them to dissolve).
Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate.
Takes about 2 weeks to legally change your name by deed poll.
Many forget that marriage is a legal and binding contract with the government, primarily for tax law. It was hijacked by the church as back when it started just about the only people that could write were the clergy, and they saw it as a good earner.
Scottish law changed, wording is the same but the times got reduced to 1 year by agreement, or 2 years if contested. London was supposed to do the same but got distracted. I suspect this case is more about putting that back on parliaments inbox than any actual real problem.
To get through the courts system has probably already taken more than 1 of the 3 years needed, and this particular couple will be past the 5 years long before any laws get changed."
It's a legal contract with the government - and one of the triad wants out.
The problem here is that historically women have been forced to stay in relationships against their will. Forced by men. I thought we had gotten past this - but apparently not. There is absolutely no reason for them to stay together, other than to breed unhappiness. This is basically abuse of the woman's mental health by the state. I know how painful it was for my partner to have to wait the two years to get his divorce, so I cannot imagine how painful it must be for this poor lady. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"she could just not live with him?
if he dies within 5 yrs she inherits all his shit too.
I think if he dies anytime soon she might be in trouble. (That was posted in mild jest.)
my first thought was to kill him tbh, then this other idea seemed more legal.
Separation and waiting is DEFINITELY more legal than murder.
i may have committed a forum faux pas by admitting my first thought is to kill men.
*backs out the topic, hoping no men noticed*"
No patios will be examined. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"She was divorcing him but the court ruled that his behaviour was not unreasonable enough for the marriage to count as having irretrievably broken down.
She can separate from him for 5 years and then divorce him.
Its all quite well defined.
This was basically what happened with me. Because I didnt contest or agree to the divorce, the judge read her statement of unreasonable behaviour. Said it was not strong enough reasons to end a 10 year marriage, and suggested counselling and threw it out. We then divorced as a 5 year seperation.
Did you not want a divorce then?"
I was not in a mental state to know wgat I wanted. I was literally suicidal after she left, and took a massive overdose. Obviously this never worked, bur dealing with a divorce was tipping me over the edge and I could not function, so I just acted neutrally... almost Zombie like.
Ironically, years later I did not know if I was still married or not as I'd mived around a bit. Ended up having to chase her through her solicitor to get it done on a 5 year seperation.
No idea what she is doing now as I havent seen her for years. But I hope she is happy and found what she was looking for  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"legalities aside I wouldn't want to stay with someone who so clearly and publicly didn't want to be with me. "
Sheer spite would seem the obvious motivation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's a legal contract with the government - and one of the triad wants out.
The problem here is that historically women have been forced to stay in relationships against their will. Forced by men. I thought we had gotten past this - but apparently not. There is absolutely no reason for them to stay together, other than to breed unhappiness. This is basically abuse of the woman's mental health by the state. I know how painful it was for my partner to have to wait the two years to get his divorce, so I cannot imagine how painful it must be for this poor lady."
This is one of the few archaic legal contracts that is not sexist against Women, this particular case happens to be that way, but the law works the same for either side seeking the divorce.
But putting the bright side on it having legally in court said he doesn't mind about her being with other men, means she can do whatever she wants, can live with a man etc. but if he gets his dick wet she can immediately get a divorce for him being unfaithful. Poetic justice 
But yes the law does need updating. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"legalities aside I wouldn't want to stay with someone who so clearly and publicly didn't want to be with me.
Sheer spite would seem the obvious motivation."
It does seem that way but we'll never know. I have known people whose partners won't agree to a divorce to get back at their partner...until they meet someone they want to be with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since.
No, it *does* matter.
Because while she remains married a contract exists. They are a partnership in the eyes of the law (yet the law won't allow them to dissolve).
Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate."
This is exactly why the judge refused it though ... our law system is mostly based in common law and precedents ... if the judge dissolves its too easily then it will have repercussions in future contract law cases that have nothing to do with marriage and leaves people wide open to being exploited elsewhere
Logically you cant just end a contract because one party changed their mind
But i get tha its hard to think of a marriage as just a contract |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's a legal contract with the government - and one of the triad wants out.
The problem here is that historically women have been forced to stay in relationships against their will. Forced by men. I thought we had gotten past this - but apparently not. There is absolutely no reason for them to stay together, other than to breed unhappiness. This is basically abuse of the woman's mental health by the state. I know how painful it was for my partner to have to wait the two years to get his divorce, so I cannot imagine how painful it must be for this poor lady.
This is one of the few archaic legal contracts that is not sexist against Women, this particular case happens to be that way, but the law works the same for either side seeking the divorce.
But putting the bright side on it having legally in court said he doesn't mind about her being with other men, means she can do whatever she wants, can live with a man etc. but if he gets his dick wet she can immediately get a divorce for him being unfaithful. Poetic justice
But yes the law does need updating."
I dont think that legally she could divorce him for that, as the sex would have been after they seperated, and in the eyes of the law it wouldnt be committing adultery.
I may be wrong, but I seem to remember this from my last divorce! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Divorce should be made simple. A marriage ceremony is simple, so you should be able to divorce easily too."
The problem is that divorce often involves money,property and children that need to be legally sorted out |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Divorce should be made simple. A marriage ceremony is simple, so you should be able to divorce easily too."
It's tax related, my experience is its always easy to get taxed, bloody hard to get out of it though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since.
No, it *does* matter.
Because while she remains married a contract exists. They are a partnership in the eyes of the law (yet the law won't allow them to dissolve).
Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate.
This is exactly why the judge refused it though ... our law system is mostly based in common law and precedents ... if the judge dissolves its too easily then it will have repercussions in future contract law cases that have nothing to do with marriage and leaves people wide open to being exploited elsewhere
Logically you cant just end a contract because one party changed their mind
But i get tha its hard to think of a marriage as just a contract "
I *only* think as marriage as a contract. I would not get married for any other reason.
This is a contract with no fixed or minimum term when signed. You should be able to leave with a minimum of notice. You should not have a five year waiting period. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *b coupleCouple
over a year ago
southampton |
We both don't agree with divorce not for religious reasons as we're both atheist. We just believe if you was madly in love long enough to get married then you're more than likely to full in love again. You don't marry someone you hate, I feel a lot of couples now days get divorced so quickly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We both don't agree with divorce not for religious reasons as we're both atheist. We just believe if you was madly in love long enough to get married then you're more than likely to full in love again. You don't marry someone you hate, I feel a lot of couples now days get divorced so quickly. "
Once the love has gone, it's very hard if not impossible to get back. I don't regret my divorce at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We both don't agree with divorce not for religious reasons as we're both atheist. We just believe if you was madly in love long enough to get married then you're more than likely to full in love again. You don't marry someone you hate, I feel a lot of couples now days get divorced so quickly. "
No... I still think the man I nearly married is a cunt. No chance I would knowingly be within fifty miles of him. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orum TrollWoman
over a year ago
•+• Access Denied •+• |
"We both don't agree with divorce not for religious reasons as we're both atheist. We just believe if you was madly in love long enough to get married then you're more than likely to full in love again. You don't marry someone you hate, I feel a lot of couples now days get divorced so quickly. "
it was awful near the end with the one ex i still actually do like. i just didn't want to live with him any more, or be sexually intimate with him.
i'd get back with him now if there was some kind of sexual attraction and incentive to do that but there isn't for me. we're great friends now but that is it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Divorce should be made simple. A marriage ceremony is simple, so you should be able to divorce easily too.
The problem is that divorce often involves money,property and children that need to be legally sorted out"
Thank you for stating the obvious. The while legal system could make it a whole lot easier though. Property and children are often involved before marriage these days anyway. Marriage is just a ceremony. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"if you was madly in love long enough to get married then you're more than likely to full in love again.
Believe me, that's not true!"
This so isn't true. Once the feeling of 'in love' has gone, there is no getting it back. Believe me when I say I truly know what I'm talking about. You can love someone deeply but not be 'in love'. Marriage should be about being 'in love' . That's why so many marriages fail as it's difficult to keep the 'in love' feeling going strong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"it appears her solicitors played down the uneasonable behaviour to keep the divorce amicable. But over did it so he just turned up and said it wasn't unreasonable.
Had she seeked divorce on stronger grounds it would have gone through.
This only matters if she wants to remarry in the next 3 years, because after 5 years apart she can get a no fault divorce anyway.
The law was due to be updated in 96, but ran out of time and hasn't been looked at since.
No, it *does* matter.
Because while she remains married a contract exists. They are a partnership in the eyes of the law (yet the law won't allow them to dissolve).
Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate.
This is exactly why the judge refused it though ... our law system is mostly based in common law and precedents ... if the judge dissolves its too easily then it will have repercussions in future contract law cases that have nothing to do with marriage and leaves people wide open to being exploited elsewhere
Logically you cant just end a contract because one party changed their mind
But i get tha its hard to think of a marriage as just a contract
I *only* think as marriage as a contract. I would not get married for any other reason.
This is a contract with no fixed or minimum term when signed. You should be able to leave with a minimum of notice. You should not have a five year waiting period."
If you only think of it as a contract then you should understand that it cant then be terminated just because one side days so ... any other contract with no waiting period built in wouldnt be terminated so why should this contract? One side or the ither has to prove they other party is not fulfilling their side of the contract which is where the unreasonable behaviour thing comes in ... again if people were allowed to be divorced for no reason then it would have massive repercussions on other contract law ... it seems unfair but its actually to protect the fairness of the law
However just like almost any other contract if both oarties can agree between them to dissolve the contract then there is no issue |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"legalities aside I wouldn't want to stay with someone who so clearly and publicly didn't want to be with me. "
So she shouldn't... she should separate and then she can have a divorce after 5 years even if he objects. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Plus it's a right fucking pig to change your name without a marriage or divorce certificate."
Its easy... anyone can call themselves what they like... and a legal change in your name is easy to do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Surely the "fault" was hers....and so it would need to be him that sought the divorce.
We do have "no fault divorces" but these (as far as I know) need to be mutually agreed?"
How do you assume it is her fault ..? His unreasonable behaviour for many years prior to her finding the company of someone else more tolerable.?
Of course we have no idea the reasons for breakdown.About time these laws were changed.
My son has been forced to go for unreasonable behaviour as his partner will not reply to any mail and he does not stay in one place. They have been separated two years or more.
Actually My son has great grounds but did not want to bring up the past and get his partners citizenship removed.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
"
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'"
Would you say the same about a husband who decides he doesn't want to be married to his wife anymore just because she's got old and he wants to find someone younger and more glamorous? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'"
Thats a luxury afforded to you when you are just in a relationship and therefore it can be based entirely on emotions
When you get married you have a contract which makes everything less simple .., and maybe if people want that easy an out then they are not thinking through the seriousness of marriage in the first place and are thinking of it as "a wedding" rather than a lifelong legal bond |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'
Would you say the same about a husband who decides he doesn't want to be married to his wife anymore just because she's got old and he wants to find someone younger and more glamorous?"
if he doesn't want to be married to her anymore, absolutely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'
Thats a luxury afforded to you when you are just in a relationship and therefore it can be based entirely on emotions
When you get married you have a contract which makes everything less simple .., and maybe if people want that easy an out then they are not thinking through the seriousness of marriage in the first place and are thinking of it as "a wedding" rather than a lifelong legal bond"
I suspect that people who married as long ago as this couple did, didn't really have an option. I know my parents basically married because of peer pressure, because it was at that point still really considered wrong to live together without getting married.
I mean, it's not like they got married six months ago and it all looks like a tax or immigration scam. These aren't young people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'
Would you say the same about a husband who decides he doesn't want to be married to his wife anymore just because she's got old and he wants to find someone younger and more glamorous?"
Yes. If one of the people in the couple doesn't want to be married to the other person anymore then they should be able to get a divorce. I don't care what reason they have. They don't need a reason. 'I don't want to be married to this person anymore' is enough of a reason, and I think it's abhorrent that your reasons are plastered everywhere as a matter of public record.
This was so distressing for my partner - hence why he waited two years. He didn't want to air his dirty laundry about his wife and sex for everyone to read. Niether did my parents want it to be known publicly that my mother had an affair. It's awful forcing people to stay together just because the courts can't be confidential in divorce cases. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'
Would you say the same about a husband who decides he doesn't want to be married to his wife anymore just because she's got old and he wants to find someone younger and more glamorous?
Yes. If one of the people in the couple doesn't want to be married to the other person anymore then they should be able to get a divorce. I don't care what reason they have. They don't need a reason. 'I don't want to be married to this person anymore' is enough of a reason, and I think it's abhorrent that your reasons are plastered everywhere as a matter of public record.
This was so distressing for my partner - hence why he waited two years. He didn't want to air his dirty laundry about his wife and sex for everyone to read. Niether did my parents want it to be known publicly that my mother had an affair. It's awful forcing people to stay together just because the courts can't be confidential in divorce cases."
They are kept confidential. I think this is online because of the appeal, I'm not sure why though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'
Thats a luxury afforded to you when you are just in a relationship and therefore it can be based entirely on emotions
When you get married you have a contract which makes everything less simple .., and maybe if people want that easy an out then they are not thinking through the seriousness of marriage in the first place and are thinking of it as "a wedding" rather than a lifelong legal bond
I suspect that people who married as long ago as this couple did, didn't really have an option. I know my parents basically married because of peer pressure, because it was at that point still really considered wrong to live together without getting married.
I mean, it's not like they got married six months ago and it all looks like a tax or immigration scam. These aren't young people."
You just proved my point though ... your assumption is that they got married for the wrong reasons... it was peer pressure rather than properly thinking through the seriousness and legality of it ... that doesnt mean the law (which they knew they were getting into) should be bent to make it easier for them to get out of their situation
Nobody is stopping her leaving him ... thy are just stopping her from getting out of a contract without just cause
The law cannot be emotional or it fails to serve its purpose ... but this is where marriage is flawed to begin with because you legally bind yourself to someone because of an emotional connection |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The law cannot be emotional or it fails to serve its purpose..."
The first thing my first law lecturer ever told us and hence the reason people often get upset by the results of judicial proceedings, they let emotions cloud the actual word of the law. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've just read the judgment online, I can see why according to the law she was unsuccessful now.
It's sad that she can't get a divorce as the marriage has irretrievably broken down but unfortunately her grounds were pretty pathetic.
I don't think she should need any other fucking reason than 'I don't want to be married to that person anymore. I want to disentangle them from my life.'
Would you say the same about a husband who decides he doesn't want to be married to his wife anymore just because she's got old and he wants to find someone younger and more glamorous?
Yes. If one of the people in the couple doesn't want to be married to the other person anymore then they should be able to get a divorce. I don't care what reason they have. They don't need a reason. 'I don't want to be married to this person anymore' is enough of a reason, and I think it's abhorrent that your reasons are plastered everywhere as a matter of public record.
This was so distressing for my partner - hence why he waited two years. He didn't want to air his dirty laundry about his wife and sex for everyone to read. Niether did my parents want it to be known publicly that my mother had an affair. It's awful forcing people to stay together just because the courts can't be confidential in divorce cases."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/24/tini-owens-trapped-loveless-marriage-judges-refuse-divorce
Tini Owens has been married for 40 years but has been refused a divorce as it was deemed the marriage has not irretrievably broken down because her husband doesn't want a divorce. She had an affair and says that she has put up with his unreasonable behaviour for years.
What do you think about this story and the fact we do not have a no fault divorce available in this country?
"
All she has to do is wait five years and then she’ll be able to divorce him regardless of his views on it as long as they have lived separately in that time.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
