header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 April 2017 / David Emmerson OBE
Issue: 7741 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Unreasonable behaviour

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7741_emmerson

The Owens decision strengthens the need for divorce reform & no fault divorce, says David Emmerson
  • The Court of Appeal’s rejection of Tini Owens’s petition for divorce highlights the difficulties that parties can face when a divorce is contested and bolsters the momentum for legal reform.

On 24 March 2017 the Court of Appeal, which included the President of the family court, refused the appeal of Mrs Tini Owens against the refusal of His Honour Judge Tolson, to grant the wife a divorce. The decision of the trial judge was that even though he found that the marriage had broken down and the prospects of reconciliation hopeless, he nonetheless did not find that the wife had proved the allegations in her unreasonable behaviour petition.

The task for the Court of Appeal was to consider whether or not the judge was “wrong” in coming to this conclusion on the facts and therefore, the Court of Appeal entitled to interfere with the trial judge’s decision pursuant to CPR 52.11(3)(a).

The facts of the case are, in many

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll