Loveless marriage and divorce can affect LGBT relationships
Lawyers Warn of Divorce on Demand if Woman in 'Loveless' Marriage is Allowed to Leave. Does this apply to you?
Last week, the Supreme Court heard about a woman who wants to divorce her husband on the grounds that she is in a “loveless” marriage is being denied because, in the eyes of the law, his behavior isn’t viewed as bad enough to warrant ending the relationship.
Under British law, unreasonable behavior is one of the grounds for divorce and Tini Owens wants to end her 40 year marriage to her husband, Hugh on the basis that she can’t reasonably be expected to live with him. Mr Owens’ legal team, however, argued that if she’s granted her appeal to divorce, it will pave the way to a divorce on demand ideology.
In 2016 a family court judge ruled that Mrs Owens’ claim that her husband focused too much on work, didn’t give his wife attention or affection and was “unpleasant and disparaging” towards her, comprised “minor altercations of a kind to be expected in a marriage”. It was, therefore, deemed as not serious enough to grant her a divorce.
The case, however, has reignited family lawyers calls for a change in the law to allow ‘no-fault’ divorce. This form of dissolving a marriage proposes that couples can go their separate ways without having to place the blame for the breakdown in the relationship on one side or the other.
Although Mrs Owens appeal failed last year, her Barrister, Philip Marshall QC called on the Supreme Court for a “modest shift” in the interpretation of legislation. He claimed that the judge in the original case was too objective on the plea of unreasonable behavior, rather than viewing it from Mrs Owens perspective.
Mr Ownes’ legal team contested the claim, stating that Mrs Owens is seeking, in effect, to change the law, arguing that: “It is not a proper function of the Supreme Court to dilute or refashion a statute.” and that: “Parliament did not provide for divorce, either as a ground or as a fact leading to the ground, based on unilateral unhappiness.”
The court reserved judgment for a later date. Read more about us via link below.Read More