Call us: Mon - Fri 8:30am - 7pm, Sat - Sun 9am - 5pm
Call local rate 0330 056 3171
Mon - Fri 8:30am - 7pm | Sat - Sun 9am - 5pm
Call local rate 0330 056 3171
Mon - Fri 8:30am - 7pm | Sat - Sun 9am - 5pm

Jersey considers no fault divorce

A legal organisation on the island of Jersey has proposed the introduction a ‘no fault’ divorce system as well as legally binding nuptial agreements.

In a newly published report simply entitled Divorce Reform, the Jersey Law Commission proposes a raft of radical changes to family law on the island. Under ‘No fault’ divorce system, it would no longer be necessary when seeking to end a marriage to cite a specific reason, such as unreasonable behaviour or adultery.

Amongst other proposals, the current three year waiting period for divorce would be abolished and replaced with a fast track system enabling Jersey residents to obtain a divorce in a just three months. Any financial agreements which the couple signed, either before their wedding (‘prenuptial agreements’) or subsequently (‘postnuptial agreements’), should also be legally binding the Commission suggested.

If enacted the proposals would bring family law on Jersey into line with the legal systems of Guernsey and Scotland. Currently family legislation – principally the Matrimonial Causes Act 1949 – is widely regarded as outdated.

Advocate Barbara Corbett is a member of the Law Commission. She insisted that:

“It should be possible to obtain a divorce without apportioning blame. If a couple agree that their marriage is at an end they should be able to apply jointly for a divorce. There should be no need for court proceedings.”

The Jersey Law Commission, like its English equivalent, reviews current legislation and makes proposals for reform where necessary.

Read the report here.

The blog team at Stowe is a group of writers based across our family law offices who share their advice on the wellbeing and emotional aspects of divorce or separation from personal experience. As well as pieces from our family law solicitors, guest contributors also regularly contribute to share their knowledge.

Contact us

As the UK's largest family law firm we understand that every case is personal.


  1. Andrew says:

    A good report, except that the Commissioners ran out of guts when they recommended that prenups should not be binding if they cased “substantial hardship” to a party. How difficult is it to grasp that allowing one party to break his or her (and sorry, but it is usually her) word causes gross and unacceptable hardship to the other party?

    If necessary to protect minor children, postpone the order during their minority – otherwise preups should be cast-iron..

  2. JamesB says:

    I agree entirely with Andrew’s comment and view above.

Leave a comment

Help & advice categories


Newsletter Sign Up

Sign up for advice on divorce and relationships from our lawyers, divorce coaches and relationship experts.

What type of information are you looking for?

Privacy Policy