header-logo header-logo

Supplemental petitions

04 June 2010
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

I just cannot make out when a supplemental divorce petition is and is not appropriate...

I just cannot make out when a supplemental divorce petition is and is not appropriate. Am I right in thinking that it can be used where fresh adultery follows the original petition or there are acts of unreasonable behaviour subsequent to the original petition? Can it be used where two years’ separation has expired only after the original petition was presented and the petitioner wishes to rely on s 1(2)(d) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973?

A supplemental petition speaks to matters which arose after the presentation of the original petition and so it is certainly the correct means by which to plead allegations of acts of adultery or unreasonable behaviour which have taken place after proceedings were started.

It also has the advantage of attracting a lower court fee than a fresh petition (unless it is a second petition presented with leave of the court). However, a fresh petition is required where two years’ separation with consent are sought

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