Mrs Owens, who is 66 years old, filed for divorce in 2015, when she moved out of the family home after over 40 years of marriage. She cited 27 allegations of unreasonable behaviour against her husband, who is in his seventies, including his insensitivity and the fact that she felt mistrusted and unloved. It is unusual in the UK for divorces to be defended, but that is what Mr Owens did, saying he believed they still had “a few years to enjoy”. The court agreed that the marriage had not ‘irretrievably broken down’ and the divorce was not allowed.
Mrs Owens took her case to the Court of Appeal, which also refused the divorce, saying that Mrs Owens’ allegations were of the sort of behaviour “to be expected in marriage”.
Supreme Court hears the Owens’ divorce case
The case has now been heard in the Supreme Court, and this has once again raised the issue of the need for a change in the law to allow no-fault divorce. Current divorce law is based on the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, and many of the principles come from the late 1960s. Accordingly, a divorce can only be sought on the grounds that the marriage has irretrievably broken down and the person seeking the divorce has to rely on one of five facts:
- adultery
- unreasonable behaviour
- two years’ separation with the agreement of the other party
- five years’ separation without the agreement of the other party
- desertion
In this particular case, Resolution has been granted exclusive permission to intervene and it, and Mrs Owens’, solicitor have said that it should be possible to apply current law to the case and grant Mrs Owens’ a divorce. Mrs Owens’ position is that the two previous courts have misinterpreted current law, requiring proof of her husband’s unreasonable behaviour, which she believes is not what is intended by the law.
Renewed calls for no-fault divorce
Bradie Pell. Partner and head of family law.
The case has brought renewed calls for a change in divorce law, which is supported by Resolution and many legal professionals, including the UK’s most senior judge, Baroness Hale (one of the Supreme Court judges overseeing the Owens’ case).In a recent press release by Resolution, it discusses one of its own surveys that indicates that nine out of ten professionals think that the current law “makes it harder for them to reduce conflict and confrontation between clients and their ex-partners”.
The Supreme Court’s decision in the Owens’ case will be available later in the year. However, judges don’t make the law, parliament does, so, even if it is agreed that no-fault divorce should be introduced, that will require an Act of Parliament and that will certainly not happen in time to help Mrs Owens. If the Supreme Court does not allow her divorce, Mrs Owens’ only option will be to seek a divorce based on a five-year separation, which will be in 2020.
