Divorce Unit 23. Preview Definition Definition History History Grounds for divorce Grounds for...

DivorceDivorce

Unit 23Unit 23

PreviewPreview

DefinitionDefinition HistoryHistory Grounds for divorceGrounds for divorce Stages in obtaining a divorceStages in obtaining a divorce Court ordersCourt orders Types of divorceTypes of divorce CasesCases

DivorceDivorce

The legal termination of marriageThe legal termination of marriage Under English law, the basis for Under English law, the basis for

divorce is the irretrievable divorce is the irretrievable breakdown of marriagebreakdown of marriage

The official request to a court to end The official request to a court to end a marriage is called divorce petitiona marriage is called divorce petition

Petitioner - respondentPetitioner - respondent

History of divorce law in UKHistory of divorce law in UK

Prior to 1857 church courts Prior to 1857 church courts determined the law on divorce: determined the law on divorce: although nullity decrees could be although nullity decrees could be made, divorce was not available made, divorce was not available through courtsthrough courts

The only form of divorce – by an Act The only form of divorce – by an Act of Parliament – a hugely expensive of Parliament – a hugely expensive procedureprocedure

HistoryHistory

Matrimonial causes Act 1857 – created an Matrimonial causes Act 1857 – created an alternative to divorce by an Act of Parliament: a alternative to divorce by an Act of Parliament: a procedure through the courtsprocedure through the courts

Difference between the grounds available to Difference between the grounds available to husband and wife, e.g. a husband could rely on husband and wife, e.g. a husband could rely on his wife’s adultery, but a wife could rely on a his wife’s adultery, but a wife could rely on a husband’s adultery only if there were aggravating husband’s adultery only if there were aggravating circumstances (incest, ‘unnatural offences’)circumstances (incest, ‘unnatural offences’)

HistoryHistory

Matrimonial Causes Act 1923 put Matrimonial Causes Act 1923 put husband and wife in the same husband and wife in the same positionposition

Matrimonial Causes Act 1937 Matrimonial Causes Act 1937 extended the grounds to include extended the grounds to include cruelty, desertion or incurable cruelty, desertion or incurable insanityinsanity

HistoryHistory

Matrimonial causes Act 1973Matrimonial causes Act 1973 Before 1973 the petitioner was Before 1973 the petitioner was

required to present in open court required to present in open court evidence to support the grounds set evidence to support the grounds set out in the petition, by introducing out in the petition, by introducing witnesses if necessary – expensive, witnesses if necessary – expensive, embarassing, stressfulembarassing, stressful

HistoryHistory

A special procedure introduced for A special procedure introduced for undefended divorces: the petitioner undefended divorces: the petitioner had to lodge the petition outlining had to lodge the petition outlining the grounds for divorce, a statement the grounds for divorce, a statement concerning arrangements for the concerning arrangements for the children and an affidavit confirming children and an affidavit confirming the truth of these documentsthe truth of these documents

Grounds for divorceGrounds for divorce

1. Adultery1. Adultery 2. Unreasonable bahaviour2. Unreasonable bahaviour 3. Two years separation3. Two years separation 4. Desertion4. Desertion 5. Five years separation5. Five years separation

AdulteryAdultery

Sexual intercourse by consent between Sexual intercourse by consent between a married person and someone of the a married person and someone of the opposite sex who is not that person’s opposite sex who is not that person’s spousespouse

The PETITIONER must satisfy (= The PETITIONER must satisfy (= convince) the court that the convince) the court that the RESPONDENT has committed adultery RESPONDENT has committed adultery and that it is therefore intolerable to live and that it is therefore intolerable to live with themwith them

AdulteryAdultery

Cohabitation of over 6 months after Cohabitation of over 6 months after becoming aware of adultery becoming aware of adultery ‘destroys’ the fact‘destroys’ the fact

UNREASONABLE UNREASONABLE BEHAVIOURBEHAVIOUR

The petitioner must satisfy the court The petitioner must satisfy the court that the respondent has behaved in that the respondent has behaved in such a way that the petitioner cannot such a way that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with reasonably be expected to live with themthem

Unreasonable behaviourUnreasonable behaviour

A subjective view should be taken of A subjective view should be taken of the petitioner’s character and the petitioner’s character and personality and an objective view of personality and an objective view of whether it is reasonable to expect whether it is reasonable to expect her to live with the respondent her to live with the respondent ((Livingstone-Stallard v Livingstone-Livingstone-Stallard v Livingstone-Stallard Stallard 1974)1974)

Two years separation and Two years separation and consentconsent

If the parties have lived apart for a If the parties have lived apart for a continuous period of at least two continuous period of at least two years and the respondent consents years and the respondent consents to a divorce, the petitioner is entitled to a divorce, the petitioner is entitled to a divorce.to a divorce.

DesertionDesertion

The petitioner must satisfy the court The petitioner must satisfy the court that the respondent has deserted that the respondent has deserted them for a continuous period of at them for a continuous period of at least two years.least two years.

Five years separationFive years separation

If the parties have lived apart for a If the parties have lived apart for a continuous period of at least five continuous period of at least five years, the petitioner is entitled to a years, the petitioner is entitled to a divorce, whether or not the divorce, whether or not the respondent agrees.respondent agrees.

A timetable for divorce A timetable for divorce procedures under the procedures under the Family Law Act 1996Family Law Act 1996

0 months ‘information meeting’

3 months Statement of marital breakdown (cannot be made until the parties have been marrie at least 1 year)

3 months, 14 days

The period of reflection and consideration starts; marriage counselling; arrangements for children and financial arrangements

12 months, 14 days

If there are no children, the parties can apply for the divorce order

18 months, 14 days

Thos unable to apply at the 12 month stage may apply for a divorce order

Stages in obtaining a Stages in obtaining a divorcedivorce

1. The DECREE NISI: the court is 1. The DECREE NISI: the court is satisfied that the petitioner is satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to a divorce. Once this is entitled to a divorce. Once this is granted, the petitioner must wait for granted, the petitioner must wait for a minimum period of six weeks a minimum period of six weeks before applying for the DECREE before applying for the DECREE ABSOLUTE, which is the final stage in ABSOLUTE, which is the final stage in the divorce.the divorce.

The Family Law Act 1996The Family Law Act 1996

Provides protection for married persons, Provides protection for married persons, cohabitants, and other categories of persons cohabitants, and other categories of persons against domestic violence and harassment; against domestic violence and harassment; regulates rights of occupation of propertyregulates rights of occupation of property

If domestic violence or harassment has If domestic violence or harassment has occurred or is likely to occur, such persons occurred or is likely to occur, such persons can apply to the court for a can apply to the court for a non-non-molestation ordermolestation order

Occupation orderOccupation order – governs who is allowed – governs who is allowed to enter and remain in the property or, to enter and remain in the property or, conversely, who must keep away from itconversely, who must keep away from it

The Children Act 1989The Children Act 1989

Under this Act, the court can make a Under this Act, the court can make a variety of orders regarding children:variety of orders regarding children:

Contact orderContact order Residence orderResidence order Prohibited steps orderProhibited steps order Specific issues orderSpecific issues order

Contact orderContact order

Requires the party with whom a child Requires the party with whom a child is living to allow the child to visit or is living to allow the child to visit or stay with another party or parties on stay with another party or parties on a regular basisa regular basis

Residence orderResidence order

Settles arrangements about where Settles arrangements about where the child is to livethe child is to live

Prohibited steps orderProhibited steps order

Designed to prevent a party from Designed to prevent a party from taking certain steps in relation to the taking certain steps in relation to the children which might be to their children which might be to their detriment (e.g. taking them abroad detriment (e.g. taking them abroad to live permanently)to live permanently)

Specific issues orderSpecific issues order

Determines specific issues that have Determines specific issues that have arisen regarding care of the child arisen regarding care of the child (e.g. medical treatment)(e.g. medical treatment)

STATEMENT OF STATEMENT OF ARRANGEMENTSARRANGEMENTS

When applying for a divorce in a When applying for a divorce in a marriage in which there is a child or marriage in which there is a child or children, the petitioner must also children, the petitioner must also send a statement of arrangements send a statement of arrangements for the children to the court which for the children to the court which sets out the arrangements proposed sets out the arrangements proposed for the children after the divorcefor the children after the divorce

Factors taken into accountFactors taken into account

The wishes of the childThe wishes of the child Their physical, emotional, and educational Their physical, emotional, and educational

needsneeds The likely effect of any changeThe likely effect of any change The child’s age, background and The child’s age, background and

characteristicscharacteristics Any harm the child has suffered or might Any harm the child has suffered or might

suffer in the futuresuffer in the future How capable the parents are of meeting the How capable the parents are of meeting the

child’s needschild’s needs

Property: a jokeProperty: a joke

A wealthy businessman asks his wife A wealthy businessman asks his wife what she would like for her birthday: what she would like for her birthday: ‘a car, jewellery, perhaps?” She ‘a car, jewellery, perhaps?” She replies: „Honey, I want a divorce” replies: „Honey, I want a divorce” „Hell, I can’t afford that”, comes the „Hell, I can’t afford that”, comes the shocked replyshocked reply

Property rightsProperty rights

Property adjustment orderProperty adjustment order Periodical payments orderPeriodical payments order Pension sharing orderPension sharing order Lump sum orderLump sum order Order for sale of propertyOrder for sale of property Consent orderConsent order

Property adjustment orderProperty adjustment order

An order affecting the rights of An order affecting the rights of ownership of property of either ownership of property of either spouse, or both, e.g. the transfer of spouse, or both, e.g. the transfer of the matrimonial home to one party the matrimonial home to one party or the other.or the other.

Periodical payments orderPeriodical payments order

An order that one party must pay a An order that one party must pay a regular sum of money to the other regular sum of money to the other partyparty

Pension sharing orderPension sharing order

An order providing for one party to An order providing for one party to claim a share of the other party’s claim a share of the other party’s pension entitlement.pension entitlement.

Lump sum orderLump sum order

An order for the payment of a An order for the payment of a specified sum of moneyspecified sum of money

Consent orderConsent order

Arrangements between the partiesArrangements between the parties Usually in the case of an ‘amicable’ Usually in the case of an ‘amicable’

divorcedivorce Drawn up by a solicitor, but it has to Drawn up by a solicitor, but it has to

be formally approved by the courtbe formally approved by the court

Factors taken into accountFactors taken into account

The income and earning capacity of the partiesThe income and earning capacity of the parties The financial needs and obligations of each partyThe financial needs and obligations of each party The standard of living enjoyed by the family The standard of living enjoyed by the family

during the marriageduring the marriage The age of each party and the length of the The age of each party and the length of the

marriagemarriage Any disabilities from which either party may sufferAny disabilities from which either party may suffer The contribution made by each party during the The contribution made by each party during the

marriagemarriage The conduct of the parties does not usually have a The conduct of the parties does not usually have a

bearing on the nature of the financial settlementbearing on the nature of the financial settlement

The role of the lawyerThe role of the lawyer

1. Demonstrating empathy with the 1. Demonstrating empathy with the client’s difficult personal circumstances, client’s difficult personal circumstances, without losing legal objectivitywithout losing legal objectivity

2. The need for mediation and 2. The need for mediation and negotiation between the parties; it is negotiation between the parties; it is better that issues are settled by mutual better that issues are settled by mutual agreement rather than by court agreement rather than by court proceedingsproceedings

3. Guidelines rather than strict rules3. Guidelines rather than strict rules

Fault divorceFault divorce

Until 1969, divorce would be granted only Until 1969, divorce would be granted only to the innocent party (petitioner) who to the innocent party (petitioner) who could prove that the other party could prove that the other party (respondent) committed a matrimonial (respondent) committed a matrimonial offenceoffence

No-fault divorceNo-fault divorce

After 1969After 1969 Pioneered in the US by the State of Pioneered in the US by the State of

California with the passage of the California with the passage of the Family Law Act of 1969Family Law Act of 1969

The Act signed by Governor R. Reagan The Act signed by Governor R. Reagan on September 4, 1969 and became on September 4, 1969 and became valid on January 1, 1970valid on January 1, 1970

Abolished the old common law for Abolished the old common law for divorcedivorce

Grounds for no-fault divorceGrounds for no-fault divorce

Less specific reasons, such as Less specific reasons, such as incompatibility or irreconcilable differencesincompatibility or irreconcilable differences

The court decides how to divide communal The court decides how to divide communal property and who gets custody of the property and who gets custody of the childrenchildren

If one of the spouses is financially If one of the spouses is financially dependent on the other, the court will dependent on the other, the court will usually order the other one to pay alimony usually order the other one to pay alimony (AmE) or maintenance (BrE)(AmE) or maintenance (BrE)

““Uncontested” divorceUncontested” divorce

Two parties are able to come to an Two parties are able to come to an agreement about the property, agreement about the property, children and support issueschildren and support issues

When the parties can agree and When the parties can agree and present the court with a fair and present the court with a fair and equitalbe agreement, approval of the equitalbe agreement, approval of the divorce is almost guaranteeddivorce is almost guaranteed

Divorce todayDivorce today

In the UK, 40 % of marriages end in In the UK, 40 % of marriages end in divorcedivorce

In the USA almost 50 %In the USA almost 50 % Croatia – current statistics show that Croatia – current statistics show that

every fifth marriages ends in divorceevery fifth marriages ends in divorce

Divorce statistics (UK)Divorce statistics (UK)

1961-1991: fivefold rise in the divorce rate1961-1991: fivefold rise in the divorce rate Divorce rate has risen from 4.7 in 1970 to Divorce rate has risen from 4.7 in 1970 to

13.7 in 199913.7 in 1999 In 2003 the median duration of a In 2003 the median duration of a

marriage: 11.3 yearsmarriage: 11.3 years 1 in 4 children will be affeccted by divorce 1 in 4 children will be affeccted by divorce

by the time they are aged 16by the time they are aged 16 69% divorces – granted to wives69% divorces – granted to wives

Social explanations for Social explanations for increasing divorceincreasing divorce

Society’s attitudes towards marriage Society’s attitudes towards marriage have changed; people stay in intimate have changed; people stay in intimate relationships only as long as they relationships only as long as they meet their goals of personal fulfilmentmeet their goals of personal fulfilment

Increased life expectancyIncreased life expectancy Increased work pressuresIncreased work pressures Financial independence of womenFinancial independence of women

AdulteryAdulteryCleary v Cleary 1974Cleary v Cleary 1974

The wife left the husband for another The wife left the husband for another man, but then returned to him for a man, but then returned to him for a few weeks before leaving again, this few weeks before leaving again, this time to stay with her mother. The time to stay with her mother. The husband petitioned for divorce.husband petitioned for divorce.


Held: A divorce would be granted to Held: A divorce would be granted to the husband as he had established the husband as he had established both her adultery and the fact that both her adultery and the fact that he found it intolerable to live with herhe found it intolerable to live with her


Commentary: The significance of this case lies in Commentary: The significance of this case lies in the decision that the intolerability of living with the the decision that the intolerability of living with the respondent need not be related to the respondent need not be related to the respondent’s adultery. The petitioner can obtain a respondent’s adultery. The petitioner can obtain a divorce if the respondent has committed adultery, divorce if the respondent has committed adultery, regardless of whether the adultery was the cause regardless of whether the adultery was the cause of the marriage breaking down. There is no need to of the marriage breaking down. There is no need to show that a reasonable person in the petitioner’s show that a reasonable person in the petitioner’s situation would have found it intolerable to live situation would have found it intolerable to live with the respondent: all that is needed is a with the respondent: all that is needed is a statement that the petitioner finds it intolerablestatement that the petitioner finds it intolerable

Unreasonable behaviourUnreasonable behaviourLivingstone-Stallard v Livingstone-Livingstone-Stallard v Livingstone-

Stallard, 1974Stallard, 1974 The wife petitioned for divorce on the The wife petitioned for divorce on the

basis that she could not reasonably basis that she could not reasonably be expected to live with her be expected to live with her husband, who had constantly husband, who had constantly criticised her, telling her that wives criticised her, telling her that wives had to be subservient to their had to be subservient to their husbands in order to be happyhusbands in order to be happy


Stallard, 1974Stallard, 1974 Held: The decree would be granted. The Held: The decree would be granted. The

correct approach was to ask whether any correct approach was to ask whether any right-thinking person would conclude that right-thinking person would conclude that the respondent had behaved in such a way the respondent had behaved in such a way that the petitioner could not be reasonably that the petitioner could not be reasonably expected to live with them, taking into expected to live with them, taking into account the circumstances and the account the circumstances and the personalities of the partiespersonalities of the parties


Stallard, 1974Stallard, 1974 Significant point: the emphasis on the objective Significant point: the emphasis on the objective

element in the test applied by the courts: a element in the test applied by the courts: a decree will not automatically be granted simply decree will not automatically be granted simply because the petitioner believes that the because the petitioner believes that the respondent has behaved in a way that is respondent has behaved in a way that is unreasonable, but only if he or she can convince unreasonable, but only if he or she can convince the court that it is objectively unreasonable to the court that it is objectively unreasonable to expect future cohabitationexpect future cohabitation

DesertionDesertionSaunders v Saunders 1965Saunders v Saunders 1965

The wife left the husband after almost 5 The wife left the husband after almost 5 years of marriage, alleging desertion on the years of marriage, alleging desertion on the basis of his conduct towards her (expecting basis of his conduct towards her (expecting her to work long hours in their shop, even her to work long hours in their shop, even when she was heavily pregnant, failing to when she was heavily pregnant, failing to give her support when there was trouble give her support when there was trouble between her and her parents-in-law, between her and her parents-in-law, opening her mail against her wishes, and opening her mail against her wishes, and displaying a lack of consideration for her)displaying a lack of consideration for her)


Held: The conduct complained of was capable of Held: The conduct complained of was capable of amounting to constructive desertion. The test to amounting to constructive desertion. The test to be applied was whether the other spouse “had be applied was whether the other spouse “had been guilty of such grave misconduct that the been guilty of such grave misconduct that the only sensible inference is that he knew that the only sensible inference is that he knew that the complainant would in all probability withdraw complainant would in all probability withdraw permanently from cohabitation with him, if she permanently from cohabitation with him, if she acted like any reasonable person in her position”acted like any reasonable person in her position”

Constructive desertionConstructive desertion

whenwhen one partner causes the other partner to one partner causes the other partner to leave the marital home through misconduct.leave the marital home through misconduct.

If one partner is forced to leave the home If one partner is forced to leave the home because the other’s misconduct, he or she has because the other’s misconduct, he or she has been constructively deserted. been constructively deserted.

In this regime, the conduct of one spouse makes it In this regime, the conduct of one spouse makes it impossible for the other to stay in the marriage.impossible for the other to stay in the marriage.

Constructive desertionConstructive desertion

Physical or mental cruelty to the spouse Physical or mental cruelty to the spouse can constitute constructive desertion. can constitute constructive desertion. Moreover, refusing sexual intercourse can Moreover, refusing sexual intercourse can often be held to be constructive desertion. often be held to be constructive desertion. In some cases, requiring a spouse to live In some cases, requiring a spouse to live with intrusive or abusive in-laws was held with intrusive or abusive in-laws was held to be constructive desertion, as was to be constructive desertion, as was refusing to relocate to a new town or state.refusing to relocate to a new town or state.


Commentary: it is not necessarily the Commentary: it is not necessarily the spouse who leaves the matrimonial spouse who leaves the matrimonial home who is in desertion. The concept home who is in desertion. The concept of “constructive desertion” dates back of “constructive desertion” dates back to 19th c., but the need for such to 19th c., but the need for such concept is reduced since the grounds concept is reduced since the grounds for divorce have been expanded. Today for divorce have been expanded. Today fewer than 1% of petitions allege fewer than 1% of petitions allege desertiondesertion

SeparationSeparationFuller v Fuller, 1973Fuller v Fuller, 1973

The husband and wife lived together until 1964, The husband and wife lived together until 1964, when the wife moved in with another man. In 1968 when the wife moved in with another man. In 1968 the husband suffered a coronary thrombosis and was the husband suffered a coronary thrombosis and was told by his doctor that he should not live on his own. told by his doctor that he should not live on his own. Upon his discharge from hospital he went to live as a Upon his discharge from hospital he went to live as a lodger in the house where his wife was living, paying lodger in the house where his wife was living, paying a weekly sum. He ate some meals with the family, a weekly sum. He ate some meals with the family, and the wife did the washing for the whole and the wife did the washing for the whole household. In 1972 the wife petitioned for divorce on household. In 1972 the wife petitioned for divorce on the basis of five years’ separation. The petition was the basis of five years’ separation. The petition was dismissed on the grounds that they were not living dismissed on the grounds that they were not living apart.apart.


Held: The appeal would be allowed. Held: The appeal would be allowed. The parties were not living with each The parties were not living with each other in the same household within other in the same household within the meaning of the statute, as they the meaning of the statute, as they were not living together as husband were not living together as husband and wifeand wife


Commentary: The case illustrates that Commentary: The case illustrates that a husband and wife may be living a husband and wife may be living apart for the purposes of the statute apart for the purposes of the statute even if they are living under the same even if they are living under the same roof. While the wife was performing roof. While the wife was performing certain household tasks, she was not certain household tasks, she was not performing them for the husband as a performing them for the husband as a husband, but as a lodgerhusband, but as a lodger

Legal termsLegal terms

Contracting partyContracting party Ugovorna stranka; ugovarateljUgovorna stranka; ugovaratelj Breach of contractBreach of contract Kršenje ugovora, povreda ugovoraKršenje ugovora, povreda ugovora CompensationCompensation Naknada, odštetaNaknada, odšteta


PunitivePunitive KazneniKazneni Marriage breakdownMarriage breakdown Prekid bračne veze, poremećaj Prekid bračne veze, poremećaj

bračnih odnosabračnih odnosa Life sentenceLife sentence Doživotni zatvorDoživotni zatvor


ProceedingsProceedings Sudski postupak, parnicaSudski postupak, parnica PetitionerPetitioner Podnositelj zahtjeva (za razvod)Podnositelj zahtjeva (za razvod) RespondentRespondent Tuženi supružnik (kod razvoda)Tuženi supružnik (kod razvoda)


ValidityValidity Pravomoćnost, pravovaljanostPravomoćnost, pravovaljanost PrayerPrayer Tužbeni zahtjev (kod razvoda braka)Tužbeni zahtjev (kod razvoda braka) CustodyCustody Skrbništvo nad djecomSkrbništvo nad djecom


SuitSuit Zahtjev za rastavu brakaZahtjev za rastavu braka Pending suitPending suit Parnica u tijekuParnica u tijeku Ancillary relief Ancillary relief Financijska pomoć (kod razvoda)Financijska pomoć (kod razvoda)


OrderOrder Nalog, sudsko rješenjeNalog, sudsko rješenje ProvisionProvision ZbrinjavanjeZbrinjavanje Lump sumLump sum Paušalna svotaPaušalna svota


Property adjustment orderProperty adjustment order Sudski nalog o podjeli imovineSudski nalog o podjeli imovine Prohibited steps orderProhibited steps order Nalog o postupcima koji su Nalog o postupcima koji su

zabranjenizabranjeni


PetitionPetition Tužbeni zahtjevTužbeni zahtjev RegistryRegistry Prijavni uredPrijavni ured RegistrarRegistrar Voditelj registra; referentVoditelj registra; referent

Initial letter from petitioner’s Initial letter from petitioner’s solicitor to respondent’s solicitor to respondent’s

solicitorsolicitor TURNER 7 Old Hall StreetTURNER 7 Old Hall Street JONES OxfordJONES Oxford SMITH OX1 7 PBSMITH OX1 7 PB & CO telephone: +44(0)1865& CO telephone: +44(0)1865 email: email: info@tjs&co.com

Your referenceYour reference Our reference NLM/GRE.1-1Our reference NLM/GRE.1-1 Date 17 April 20-Date 17 April 20-

Messers Hatton, Moor & LesleyMessers Hatton, Moor & Lesley 35 Franklin Road35 Franklin Road ReadingReading RG 9 DZRG 9 DZ FAO Frank BarnstapleFAO Frank Barnstaple

mailto:info@tjs%26co.com

Dear SirsDear Sirs

Our client: Mary GreavesOur client: Mary Greaves Your client: Anthony GreavesYour client: Anthony Greaves

We have been instructed...We have been instructed...

We have been instructed by Mrs We have been instructed by Mrs Greaves in relation to matrimonial Greaves in relation to matrimonial matters and understand that you are matters and understand that you are in receipt of instructions to act for Mr in receipt of instructions to act for Mr Greaves.Greaves.

Kindly confirm that this is the caseKindly confirm that this is the case

Our client has come to the view that Our client has come to the view that the marriage has irretrievably broken the marriage has irretrievably broken down. She wishes to petition for down. She wishes to petition for divorce on the grounds of your client’s divorce on the grounds of your client’s adultery with Michelle Lampton. We adultery with Michelle Lampton. We understand that your client is prepared understand that your client is prepared to admit to this for the purposes of the to admit to this for the purposes of the divorce petition. Kindly confirm.divorce petition. Kindly confirm.

We understand that it is agreed between We understand that it is agreed between our respective clients that the children will our respective clients that the children will continue to live with our client at 35 continue to live with our client at 35 Rignton Crescent after the divorce, and that Rignton Crescent after the divorce, and that your client will have regular contact with your client will have regular contact with them, perhaps every Saturday. This should them, perhaps every Saturday. This should initially take place at 35 Rington Crescent, initially take place at 35 Rington Crescent, and our client does not wish the children to and our client does not wish the children to be introduced to Ms Lampton until they feel be introduced to Ms Lampton until they feel more settled with the new arrangements.more settled with the new arrangements.

With regard to financial settlement, With regard to financial settlement, please provide full disclosure of your please provide full disclosure of your client’s income, outgoings, and client’s income, outgoings, and assets. We have asked our client to assets. We have asked our client to collate her financial documentation collate her financial documentation and will revert to you with this and will revert to you with this shortly.shortly.

We look forward to hearing from you.We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfullyYours faithfully

Turner, Jones, Smith & Co.Turner, Jones, Smith & Co.

Reply from respondent’s Reply from respondent’s solicitorsolicitor

Hatton, Moor & Lesley 35 Franklin RoadHatton, Moor & Lesley 35 Franklin Road ReadingReading RG 1 9 DZRG 1 9 DZ telephone: +44(0)118 673770telephone: +44(0)118 673770 fax: +44(0)118 673771fax: +44(0)118 673771 email: email: enq@hm&les.co.uk

your ref. NLM/GRE.1-1your ref. NLM/GRE.1-1 our ref. FWB/GRE. 2-1our ref. FWB/GRE. 2-1 Messers Turner, Jones, Smith & CoMessers Turner, Jones, Smith & Co 7 Old Hall Street7 Old Hall Street OxfordOxford OX7PBOX7PB

mailto:enq@hm%26les.co.uk

WITHOUT PREJUDICEWITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Sirs,Dear Sirs,

Our client: Anthony GreavesOur client: Anthony Greaves Your client: Mary GreavesYour client: Mary Greaves

Thank you for your letter of 17 April Thank you for your letter of 17 April 20-. We confirm we are in receipt of 20-. We confirm we are in receipt of instructions to act for Mr Greaves.instructions to act for Mr Greaves.

With regard to the specific points you With regard to the specific points you raise:raise:

1 Our client is prepared to admit adultery 1 Our client is prepared to admit adultery provided that your client agrees to the provided that your client agrees to the divorce costs being split 50/50.divorce costs being split 50/50.

2 Contact proposals: these are agreed by our 2 Contact proposals: these are agreed by our client.client.

3 Financial disclosure. Our client’s financial 3 Financial disclosure. Our client’s financial documentation is enclosed. Kindly documentation is enclosed. Kindly acknowledge receipt. We look forward to acknowledge receipt. We look forward to receiving reciprocal disclosure in due course.receiving reciprocal disclosure in due course.

Yours faithfully,Yours faithfully,

Hatton, Moor & LesleyHatton, Moor & Lesley Enc. Financial documentsEnc. Financial documents

In most cases, if the court accepts the In most cases, if the court accepts the allegations made by the petitioner in allegations made by the petitioner in the divorce petition and accordingly the divorce petition and accordingly grants a divorce, the respondent will grants a divorce, the respondent will be obliged to pay the legal costs be obliged to pay the legal costs incurred by the petitioner in applying incurred by the petitioner in applying for the divorce. These include the for the divorce. These include the solicitor’s fees as well as the court feessolicitor’s fees as well as the court fees

WITHOUT PREJUDICEWITHOUT PREJUDICE

It ensures that, in the event that Mrs It ensures that, in the event that Mrs Greaves does not agree to the 50/50 Greaves does not agree to the 50/50 division of the divorce costs, Mrs division of the divorce costs, Mrs Greaves’s solicitors wil not be able to Greaves’s solicitors wil not be able to present this letter to the court as present this letter to the court as circumstantial evidence of his circumstantial evidence of his adulteryadultery

Divorce Unit 23. Preview Definition Definition History History Grounds for divorce Grounds for...

Documents

Transcript of Divorce Unit 23. Preview Definition Definition History History Grounds for divorce Grounds for...