>under the old rules in England and Wales, anyone who wanted to split swiftly had to accuse their partner in a divorce petition of desertion, adultery or unreasonable behaviour
>if not, they had to spend two years apart if both partners agreed, or five, if one of the couple objected to the split
Christ, how archaic. I had no idea this system was even in place.
Well sorry, this basically means I’m never getting married.
I’ve worked fucking hard, bought a house on my own, have a good job with a public sector pension and a pretty successful side business.
Now getting married means someone can claim half of everything by marrying me, fucking me over, and they don’t even need to provide a reason.
Nope sorry.
I mean sure it’s good news but why the fuck has it taken this long ? Sometimes folk just drift apart and what is best for both of you is to go your seperate ways.
This is an unambiguously good thing.
Sometimes a marriage breaks down and it’s no one’s fault. The idea that one half of the marriage can drag things out for five years after things are already over (usually out of revenge and spite) is a weird anachronism which should have been abolished years ago!
US led the way on this time saving reform. UK courts will ease because of it – a commenter below said this latest reform is for England only.
I’m sceptical, there has to be a catch somewhere if the family lawyers are the ones who campaigned for it.
The whole system is currupt and a joke. As an unmarried millenial I sorta think that Pre-Nupts should be compulsary- even if u agree a 50-50 split. Why? Its not a gender thing- its about the kids. Having parents fighting over fucking money and houses and seeing the lawyers licking their lips can ruin a childhood- I know alot of you know what I mean.
It should be fast, easy and efficient to split up. The current system is anything but…
Well I suppose it could save Mr Johnson money in a few years time. Given his ‘buyers remorse’ over his latest marriage.
Is there a list anywhere of all the “unreasonable behaviors” claimed? I heard a lawyer saying they were never actually challenged so apparently “they play violin” was given once. May be a myth obviously.
This is good news I think. When my husband left and we were separated I think he looked into the divorce process and wanted to claim I’d committed “unreasonable behaviour” to speed up things. This was quite hurtful to me as I’d been really blind sided by our relationship breaking down and I don’t think I deserved to be blamed for everything. I certainly don’t believe I committed any unreasonable behaviour – what does this mean exactly? I actually really wanted to work things out, wanted to do therapy, wanted to know how I could fix things etc. I was really devastated by my husband leaving.
time to add prenups to UK law then, this is going to make it very easy for gold diggers
Now they need to update the adultery definition, my mate is going through the divorce process as his wife was having an affair with another woman, he can’t accuse her of adultery though as it only counts when it’s penetration between two members of the opposite sex 🤷♂️
95% of divorces should be a 50:50 split of literally everything from assets and liabilities to custody. They should require some legal work on both sides and a 30minute court hearing to confirm nothing dodgy is happening.
The only exceptions to that are where someone has strong evidence of abuse.
The fact this all takes so much time, the fact celebrities come here to spend months arguing over who gets what house, and the fact the rest of us a paying enormous sums for others to squabble in public is frankly crazy to me.
13 comments
>under the old rules in England and Wales, anyone who wanted to split swiftly had to accuse their partner in a divorce petition of desertion, adultery or unreasonable behaviour
>if not, they had to spend two years apart if both partners agreed, or five, if one of the couple objected to the split
Christ, how archaic. I had no idea this system was even in place.
Well sorry, this basically means I’m never getting married.
I’ve worked fucking hard, bought a house on my own, have a good job with a public sector pension and a pretty successful side business.
Now getting married means someone can claim half of everything by marrying me, fucking me over, and they don’t even need to provide a reason.
Nope sorry.
I mean sure it’s good news but why the fuck has it taken this long ? Sometimes folk just drift apart and what is best for both of you is to go your seperate ways.
This is an unambiguously good thing.
Sometimes a marriage breaks down and it’s no one’s fault. The idea that one half of the marriage can drag things out for five years after things are already over (usually out of revenge and spite) is a weird anachronism which should have been abolished years ago!
US led the way on this time saving reform. UK courts will ease because of it – a commenter below said this latest reform is for England only.
I’m sceptical, there has to be a catch somewhere if the family lawyers are the ones who campaigned for it.
The whole system is currupt and a joke. As an unmarried millenial I sorta think that Pre-Nupts should be compulsary- even if u agree a 50-50 split. Why? Its not a gender thing- its about the kids. Having parents fighting over fucking money and houses and seeing the lawyers licking their lips can ruin a childhood- I know alot of you know what I mean.
It should be fast, easy and efficient to split up. The current system is anything but…
Well I suppose it could save Mr Johnson money in a few years time. Given his ‘buyers remorse’ over his latest marriage.
Is there a list anywhere of all the “unreasonable behaviors” claimed? I heard a lawyer saying they were never actually challenged so apparently “they play violin” was given once. May be a myth obviously.
This is good news I think. When my husband left and we were separated I think he looked into the divorce process and wanted to claim I’d committed “unreasonable behaviour” to speed up things. This was quite hurtful to me as I’d been really blind sided by our relationship breaking down and I don’t think I deserved to be blamed for everything. I certainly don’t believe I committed any unreasonable behaviour – what does this mean exactly? I actually really wanted to work things out, wanted to do therapy, wanted to know how I could fix things etc. I was really devastated by my husband leaving.
time to add prenups to UK law then, this is going to make it very easy for gold diggers
Now they need to update the adultery definition, my mate is going through the divorce process as his wife was having an affair with another woman, he can’t accuse her of adultery though as it only counts when it’s penetration between two members of the opposite sex 🤷♂️
95% of divorces should be a 50:50 split of literally everything from assets and liabilities to custody. They should require some legal work on both sides and a 30minute court hearing to confirm nothing dodgy is happening.
The only exceptions to that are where someone has strong evidence of abuse.
The fact this all takes so much time, the fact celebrities come here to spend months arguing over who gets what house, and the fact the rest of us a paying enormous sums for others to squabble in public is frankly crazy to me.