header-logo header-logo

Blame-free divorce, but how fair? Pt 2

08 April 2022 / David Burrows
Issue: 7974 / Categories: Features , Family , Divorce
printer mail-detail
77724
Is there any civil right to reply to an assertion of irretrievable breakdown? David Burrows investigates
  • The reforms to the divorce process have opened up the question of whether a spouse or civil partner responding to an assertion of irretrievable breakdown has the ability to challenge it on a human rights basis.

The reforms to the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) on divorce—parallel reforms for civil partnership dissolution are in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004)—came into force on 6 April 2022 (for an introduction to the new law, see ‘Blame-free divorce, but how fair? Pt 1’ NLJ, 4 March 2022, p13). The aim of the short Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 which brought in the reforms is to remove blame from the process. Though reformers dislike it being said, the new s 1, MCA 1973 and ss 37A and 44, CPA 2004 represent divorce or civil partnership dissolution on demand (and, subject to what follows, these provisions are mostly none the worse

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll