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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll