header-logo header-logo

Major report says ‘fault’ fuels divorce acrimony

30 October 2017
Issue: 7768 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Divorce law in England and Wales encourages dishonesty and conflict, and is out of step with the law in Scotland and most countries in Europe and North America.

That’s the conclusion of a major report commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation and led by Professor Liz Trinder, University of Essex, Finding Fault? Divorce Law and Practice in England and Wales. The reason is the ‘fault’ aspect of divorce, where a person wishing to divorce within two years (or five years if their spouse doesn’t consent) must claim unreasonable behaviour on the part of their partner. In practice, these claims cannot be investigated by the court or easily rebutted by the responding party—the court did not raise questions about the truth of a petition in any of the 592 case files analysed, despite evidence that respondents disagreed with the claims.

In England and Wales in 2015, 60% of divorces were granted on the basis of adultery or behaviour, compared to only 6% in Scotland, where couples can obtain a divorce after one year if both parties agree.

Moreover, the use of ‘fault’ fuels conflict and bitterness, which can have a detrimental knock-on effect on children. Some 62% of petitioners and 78% of respondents said using ‘fault’ had made the process more bitter, and 21% said it made it harder to sort out arrangements for children.

Prof Trinder’s report recommends removing fault entirely from divorce law and replacing it with a notification system where one or both parties register irretrievable breakdown of their marriage, and then confirm their decision after a minimum period of six months.

‘This study shows that we already have something tantamount to immediate unilateral divorce “on demand”, but masked by an often painful, and sometimes destructive, legal ritual with no obvious benefits for the parties or the state,’ she said.

‘A clearer and more honest approach, that would also be fairer, more child-centred and cost-effective, would be to reform the law to remove fault entirely.’

Resolution’s Chair Nigel Shepherd, chair of family lawyers group Resolution, which has campaigned for no-fault divorce for years, said: ‘This authoritative, academic research should eliminate any doubt from government that the law needs to change.’

Issue: 7768 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quillon Law—Neil Dooley

Quillon Law—Neil Dooley

Disputes firm expands fraud and investigations practice with partner hire

Charles Russell Speechlys—Vadim Romanoff

Charles Russell Speechlys—Vadim Romanoff

Firm strengthens corporate tax and incentives team with partner hire

Burges Salmon—Gary Delderfield & Alec Bennett

Burges Salmon—Gary Delderfield & Alec Bennett

Partner and senior associate join pensions team

NEWS
In this week's NLJ, Sophie Houghton of LexisPSL distils the key lesson from recent costs cases: if you want to exceed guideline hourly rates (GHR), you must prove why
With chronic underfunding and rising demand leaving thousands without legal help, technology could transform access to justice—if handled wisely, writes Professor Sue Prince of the University of Exeter in this week's NLJ
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
back-to-top-scroll