header-logo header-logo

02 October 2014 / Edward Heaton
Issue: 7624 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Divorce: who’s to blame

heaton_0

A recent appeal court ruling highlights the flaws in a fault-based divorce system, says Ed Heaton

In Price v Price [2014] EWCA Civ 655, the Court of Appeal revisited the issue of when a decree nisi should be set aside. Mrs Price issued a petition for divorce on 14 November 2012, based upon Mr Price’s unreasonable behaviour, specifically his alleged profligacy with money. Mr Price, acting in person, filed an acknowledgement of service, in which he indicated an intention to defend the divorce, but no answer was subsequently received by the court. In the absence of any answer, Mrs Price filed an application for decree nisi on the basis that the divorce was undefended. On 29 January 2013, the court certified that Mrs Price was entitled to a decree and decree nisi was listed for pronouncement on 18 February 2013.

On 14 February 2013, Mr Price applied for the pronouncement to be vacated and for the court’s certificate to be set aside. The pronouncement was adjourned until

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

NLJ Career Profile: Stephen Ward, The Barrister Group

NLJ Career Profile: Stephen Ward, The Barrister Group

From mowing lawns to life at the Bar: Stephen Ward reflects on an unconventional career

Clarke Willmott—Ben Loosemore

Clarke Willmott—Ben Loosemore

Commercial property partner joins Clarke Willmott in Southampton

Ellisons—Robert Tiffen

Ellisons—Robert Tiffen

Robert Tiffen joins Ellisons as Partner in growing Norwich office

NEWS
The Law Society RFC Festival of Sport returns next month, bringing together legal and financial services professionals for one of the sector’s largest annual sporting events
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

back-to-top-scroll