[ad_1]
The British Supreme Court "reluctantly" rejected an appeal from a woman seeking a divorce from her 40-year-old husband, ending a three-year court battle and urging lawmakers to revise the law on divorce in England and Wales. Tini Owens, 68, first filed for divorce from her 80-year-old husband, Hugh, when they separated in 2015, but he opposed the split
. Legal documents, Owens alleged that Hugh prioritized his work on their relationship, that he lacked affection, was often in a bad mood and that he belittled her in front of others. This caused her to feel "unhappy, misunderstood, upset and embarrbaded" and after many years, she said that she had "separated from him".
The couple has two adult children and Owens argued that there was "no prospect" but even though the court said the case was "very disturbing" and noted that & # 39; 39; she was raising "troubling feelings" she decided that Owens will have to stay married to Hugh until 2020, by which time they will be separated for five years.
"It is not up to us to change the law enacted by Parliament," writes Lady Brenda Hale, President of the Supreme Court. in the decision. "Our role is only to interpret and apply the law that Parliament has given us."
The question was a part of the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1973 which states that courts can not divorce quickly unless a husband cites adultery "unreasonable behavior" or desertion as the ground for divorce
When this is not the case, the law states that the couple must have lived apart for two years and that both parties must consent to the divorce for the divorce to be granted. If a partner opposes, as Hugh did in this case, the couple must live apart for five years before being allowed to divorce.
"It was a case that depended on the cumulative effect of a large number of small incidents" Hale wrote: "Those who have never experienced such humiliation may have It is difficult to understand how such a destructive behavior can be of confidence and confidence that should exist in any kind of humiliation.However, she was not convinced that Hugh's behavior met the bar for "unreasonable behavior" and was "reluctantly persuaded that this appeal was to be dismissed."
Simon Beccle, Owens' attorney, stated that the public find the decision "difficult to understand. "
The decision sparked a debate over whether the divorce laws in England and Wales are archaic and renewed calls for" no-fault "divorces, where
David Gaule, the British secretary of justice, said in fair that he would consider it.
With Associated Press Files
[ad_2]
Source link
