Talking ‘no-fault’ divorce and the judiciary

News|April 30th 2014

I’ve been doing the media rounds again.

After Sir James Munby caused quite a stir yesterday, I have spoken to a number of national media outlets.

In a speech he gave at the Royal Courts of Justice, the President of the Family Division made a number of comments regarding possible changes to family law in England and Wales.

I had conversations about it with BBC News and BBC Radio Five Live (my slot starts at 21:17, available for a few days) shortly after the speech, but they weren’t the only ones trying to make sense of what his suggestions might imply for families.

My views were also picked up by several national newspapers reporting on the speech and its implications.

Most of the coverage, including in the Guardian, focused on the President’s assertion that judges should be replaced by registrars in uncontested divorce cases.

This would mean getting a divorce would be a process similar to the registration of a birth or death, effectively removing it from the judicial process.

Read the full Guardian article here.

The Telegraph reported on his suggestion that unmarried couples living together should be afforded rights similar to those of married couples following a break up.

Currently, a married couple getting a divorce have certain rights to finances or assets but there are no such rights for cohabitants in English law, which Sir James claimed was an “injustice”

Read the full article here.

The Financial Times focused on Sir James’ proposal to effectively eliminate fault from the divorce proceedings altogether.

Read the full article here.

Author: Stowe Family Law

Comments(3)

  1. Luke says:

    “The Telegraph reported on his suggestion that unmarried couples living together should be afforded rights similar to those of married couples following a break up.”
    =======================================================

    I always laugh when I hear the word ‘rights’ in this context – it’s just a way to spin it – who do you have ‘rights’ against ? The other person in the relationship, that’s who.

    If we want to talk ‘right’s we need to talk ‘impositions’ as well, financial impositions based on no contract or anything at all – just whatever a Family Court decides to impose – that’s the power we are talking about.

    The long term net effect will be to drive many men and women apart, because based on such uncertainty the safe option will be not to live together. It’s a crazy idea.

  2. Marriage vs Cohabitation in the Telegraph - Marilyn Stowe Blog says:

    […] been a lot of discussion about introducing cohabitation rights for unmarried couples this […]

  3. Pete says:

    “Currently, a married couple getting a divorce have certain rights to finances or assets” ========================================================================
    Currently a man getting divorced has no rights and are constantly told its all about the woman’s needs by judges and lawyers, Lets face it a dead Taliban fighter has more rights in UK law than a man who is the none resident parent.

Leave a Reply

Close

Newsletter Sign Up

For all the latest news from Stowe Family law
please sign up for instant access today.



Privacy Policy