The judgment on the Owens v Owens case has been handed down at the Supreme Court and has unanimously dismissed Mrs Owens appeal and said she must remain married to her estranged husband, for the time being.
Graham Coy, Partner at our London Chancery Lane office has been watching this case in detail and shares his initial thoughts…
“The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed Mrs Owens appeal and said she must remain married to her estranged husband for the time being.
This will be devastating news for Mrs Owens and it puts the law back 40 years. Politicians can no longer justify inaction on their part and must introduce no-fault divorce without delay. The marriage is over as the Court of Appeal found but Mrs Owens cannot get divorced. We urgently need reform – this situation is farcical.”
You can read the full judgment here
Sorry coy, you are so wrong, divorce is regressive, not progressive. Making it easier is an abomination, you make a vow, you know what you are getting yourself into, just look at what happens to children with no fault divorce.
I think you mean “must remain married!”
We certainly do – thank you for letting us know.
This is a sad case. If I were Mr Owens I would at once offer a two-year divorce on fair financial terms.
As for the wider issue: divorce should be administrative, not judicial, and no question should arise of defending it.
Am I alone in finding Lady Hale’s analogy with constructive dismissal absurd?