header-logo header-logo

One marriage: two petitions

19 May 2011
Issue: 7466 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Is there an obligation on the part of a divorce petition respondent who seeks a cross-decree...

Is there an obligation on the part of a divorce petition respondent who seeks a cross-decree to file an answer to the lead petition as well as their own petition in the same case?

No, but the respondent may well be advised that it is tactically prudent for them to do both. However, even if the parties petition in the same case and neither files an answer, the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR) rule 71(3)(b) makes it defended and a case management conference has to be directed (rule 7.20(4)).

No doubt the object of these provisions is to enable the court to properly control the proceedings and prevent one of the parties rushing to secure an undefended decree on their petition without linkage to the other petition. We take the view that if on the case management conference the parties are agreed that each of them should be entitled to a decree and the court is satisfied that

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll