Can a judge ever say 'nope' to a divorce filing?

Permabanned
Joined
10 Dec 2008
Posts
4,080
Location
London
Reading a story about some celeb who is getting divorced after 7 weeks claiming the standard 'default' excuse.. 'irreconcielable differences'.

Couple of questions. In the UK, during divorce proceedings, if one member of the partnership actually thinks the relationship's got a chance ..

1) Do you get wierd situations where just one of the couple is seriously arguing AGAINST the divorce be granted. As in 'That argument never happened', 'I bought her flowers every day' or 'He still deep-down loves me I think, and gave me this necklace last week and told 'witness A' he still loves me just yesterday' (!!), along with 'I still think we have a massive chance of working' etc.? So the judge has to choose whether the relationship is really screwed or not?

2) Is it POSSIBLE for the judge to say to the person filing the divorce words to the effect 'The other person hasn't done anything too bad. You've had some arguments but get over it. Permission to divorce denied - I do not think you are suffering from 'irreconciliable differences' - both go and give it another go and try harder??

3) If BOTH people want a divorce, can the judge STILL say 'This is ridiculous, this whole thing is based on an argument about what name to give to the cat? And you've only had one 15 minute argument .. Divorce refused!' or is this not an option for the judge?


Basically are divorce courts always about who gets the family dog .. or can there be serious discussion about whether a divorce is going to be even awarded - despite 1 or even both members of the 'union' wanting it ....? All the ones I see on TV just seem to be about the assets .. is this always the case?
 
Technically yes, in practice no.

If a side failed to provide sufficient evidence of grounds for divorce then more evidence would be asked for, but ghr barrier is so trivially low vlthat just about anything qualifies under 'unreasonable behaviour'
 
Its not a million miles away from specific performance is it, is a marriage classed as a contract in any way ?

Yes it is, it's probably easiest to think of it as a particular subset of the law of contract though. It contains the elements of a contract - offer ("will you marry me?"), acceptance ("yes I will"), consensus ad idem (both parties want to get married hence meeting of the minds) and there's consideration (the exchange of rings if nothing else) and that would also meet the sufficiency requirement. It creates a binding link between the two parties plus gives them rights and responsibilities so it's fairly clear cut that it fulfils the definition.

As for whether it's possible for a judge to refuse to grant the divorce then yes it is but the chances are remote in the extreme, as Rich_L says it's not a high barrier nor is it particularly intended to be.
 
Option C: don't be a ****ing idiot and bet half your belongings to the other person that you'll love him/her for the rest of your life.

I really have nothing but contempt for the idea of marriage. Especially when they have a massive failure rate in the UK.
 
Option C: don't be a ****ing idiot and bet half your belongings to the other person that you'll love him/her for the rest of your life.

I really have nothing but contempt for the idea of marriage. Especially when they have a massive failure rate in the UK.

Indeed.

I am not au fait with this aspect of law at all, but am I right in thinking that once you have lived with someone as their partner for two years then they may have an entitlement to your estate in the event of a breakup?
 
Option C: don't be a ****ing idiot and bet half your belongings to the other person that you'll love him/her for the rest of your life.

I really have nothing but contempt for the idea of marriage. Especially when they have a massive failure rate in the UK.

I'm So Ronery
So ronery
So ronery and sadry arone

And so I'm ronery
A rittle ronery
Poor rittle me
 
Back
Top Bottom