Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Refused Divorce WTF

224 replies

DroningOn · 25/07/2018 10:52

Tini Owens loses Supreme Court divorce fight - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-44949856

Don't understand how a husband could hold his wife to an unhappy marriage when she wants a divorce so much she's willing to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

Is it a divorce settlement issue or something?

OP posts:
scottishdiem · 25/07/2018 12:21

Its also to do with what marriage is (or was). It was viewed as a strong, legal commitment with many repercussions. But society has moved on. Marriage itself is a relatively easy transaction now. Divorce should reflect that.

Shortstuff08 · 25/07/2018 12:25

From what I remember the reason it was denied was that she could not prove unreasonable behaviour and in fact it was her adultery and unreasonable behaviour that ended the marriage.

He just refused to accept blame. I have seen loads of women advised to string out divorces and not give their ex what they want.

Personally, if I was him I would start divorce proceedings myself and just get rid. I am sure he is a dick. But it sounds like she is a dick too and should have tried to divorce on proper grounds.

Her reasons for divorce were described as 'flimsy and exaggerated'. And there is this

Mrs Owens' lawyers argued she should not have to prove Mr Owens' behaviour has been "unreasonable", only that she should not "reasonably be expected" to remain with him

Her legal team seems like they are trying to push a no fault divorce through. Which doesn't exist. I think her legal team is taking the piss and will be earning fortunes, for being a bit shit.

I do think a no fault divorce should exist. But it doesn't. The law needs to change.

Ghostontoast · 25/07/2018 12:25

Her lawyers must be crap and given her poor advice. I wonder how much it has cost her in legal fees?

SchadenfreudePersonified · 25/07/2018 12:28

Poor thing. 'Desperately unhappy marriage'. I'm sure refusing the divorce is going to fix that.

That's just what I said to DH when we heard it on the news - "Well, things are certainly going to get better between them now."

What a horrible, spiteful man he must be (and if any evidence was needed of unreasonable behaviour, this is it). I can only imagine how desperately unhappy this woman must be, and how as she is no longer young she must be grasping art the chance for even a few years without daily misery.

What is the point in vindictively hanging onto someone who doesn't want to be with you? What an unforgiving, evil, begrudging old scrote he must be! I'll bet she's had decades of physical, mental, financial and emotional abuse from the bastard, and now the court (I wonder if these are also controlling old men) has backed him up. Whoever made this decision should be ashamed.

Poor, poor woman.

Cutietips · 25/07/2018 12:29

The thing is that there seems to be a subjective opinion at the heart of this case: the judge considered that she was ‘more sensitive than other wives’. How dare he? As I understand it, there has to be a mistake IN LAW for the judgement to be overturned. If the original judge had held in her favour and HE had appealed, they could have upheld the decision. Provided the judge followed the correct procedure, his decision is valid. But another judge may have taken the view that constantly teasing (aka bullying) or talking loudly (shouting) would be sufficient to rule in wife’s favour in the original judgement.

Aeroflotgirl · 25/07/2018 12:30

He sounds controlling, and obstinate, very stupid. I bet he does not want her to get her hands on the finances and he is digging his heels in.

Cutietips · 25/07/2018 12:32

I agree Aeroflot. Someone who thinks it’s ok to constantly wind someone else up, will pull this kind of shit to avoid her getting anything she wants.

SomeonesRealName · 25/07/2018 12:32

charlestonchaplin not that I think it is the role of the state to support people with strong religious convictions against divorce in resisting one - but how does it help such people to be divorced after five years instead of two? Surely they want to either be not divorced at all, or for it to be against their will regardless of timing?

BlueBug45 · 25/07/2018 12:32

@Ghostontoast her lawyers aren't crap. It's the law. If the other person doesn't want to divorce you within a 5 year period you just have to wait it out.

worridmum · 25/07/2018 12:35

But if it was him that had the affair would you let him divioce you stating that he is divorcing you because your unreasonable behavior? aka suggesting that you had a affair instead.

My money would be on that she does not want it be known that she had the affair so wants him to be blamed for the divoce and to go down on legal papers.

(divorce goes whom ever gets there first wins so if i were to have a affair and then pention for divorce claiming it was YOU that had the affair, you have 2 choices expect the "blame and be recorded forever as being a adultry or contest it but you cannot also pertaition for divorce while already undergoing it.

So we do need a no fault ending because why the fuck should i go on record and accept something that is not true and forever being attached to my name forever...

Aeroflotgirl · 25/07/2018 12:35

I heard of abusive NRP (usually the Fathers), pulling this type of thing in the Family Court system. It is a way of them being controlling, and EA.

SomeonesRealName · 25/07/2018 12:36

No reason to suggest her lawyers are crap it may have been a high risk strategy but that’s how most precedents are made - and provided they told her what the risk was and didn’t exaggerate her chances, they will have acted perfectly professionally.

BlueBug45 · 25/07/2018 12:36

@SomeonesRealName it doesn't.

Some Christian organisations think divorce is too easy in England and Wales. They think if they delay people divorcing it won't happen.

I knew and know a few people in this situation. All that happens is they continue with their lives as much as possible until they can get divorced. In some cases they have children with a new partner. If it's the man refusing his wife the divorce, he can then be legally obliged to pay for those children.

worridmum · 25/07/2018 12:36

(contesting it leads to the 5 year period)

MingeUterusMingeMingeYoni · 25/07/2018 12:36

I'm not sure her lawyers are crap. The legal landscape re unreasonable behaviour had been moving towards flimsy for a while in 2015. I recall being surprised in 2009 at the flimsiness of some of the petitions for unreasonable behaviour. Of course, they weren't contested.

BlueBug45 · 25/07/2018 12:37

@worridmum you cannot divorce someone due to your own adultery it is the law.

You can state due to grounds x and y which fall under unreasonable behaviour he drove you to commit adultery.

KwatahPanda · 25/07/2018 12:38

It's disgusting that "I don't want to be married anymore" isn't grounds for divorce.

KwatahPanda · 25/07/2018 12:39

Some Christian organisations think divorce is too easy in England and Wales. They think if they delay people divorcing it won't happen.

Bizzare, surely it only forces people to have children out of wedlock which they should be against. Not to mention pushed women to stay with abusive arseholes.

Viviennemary · 25/07/2018 12:39

I think divorce is already far too easy. In cases of domestic violence or adultery then of course a divorce should be granted. But these people saying oh I've changed my mind after a year or two should be made to wait five years if the other partner doesn't agree.

KwatahPanda · 25/07/2018 12:43

But these people saying oh I've changed my mind after a year or two should be made to wait five years if the other partner doesn't agree.

Why though? To punish them?

SomeonesRealName · 25/07/2018 12:44

Equally people experiencing domestic violence or abuse shouldn’t have to stand up and accuse their abuser as part of a court process as a prerequisite of escaping the marriage. And would the abuse have to be proved on the balance of probabilities?

Shortstuff08 · 25/07/2018 12:44

No reason to suggest her lawyers are crap it may have been a high risk strategy but that’s how most precedents are made - and provided they told her what the risk was and didn’t exaggerate her chances, they will have acted perfectly professionally.

Well then that's her fault for trying to use her case to set precedence. If she knew the risks and it didn't pay off

KwatahPanda · 25/07/2018 12:45

Wouldn't it make more sense to impose a waiting time for marriage rather than a waiting time to end it? Confused.

Say you want to get married and then be forced to choose a date 2 years in the future. People change their mind after a year because they weren't ready to get married in the first place.

Or just let adults do what they like? Crazy idea, I know.

worridmum · 25/07/2018 12:46

Ah sorry for the misunderstanding what i meant was.

My partner had a affair, he starts dirvoice proccedings citing that i am the one that had the affair and since he is the one that has started the ball rolling i have two choices.

1, choice is to accept this and have it on a public legal document then i am a adultery.

2 or I contest the divorce and then have to wait 5 years to get rid as i cannot also proceed with my own divorce proceedings with citing that it was him having the affair because we are already doing so under my partners proceeding that is stating that i am a cheater.

charlestonchaplin · 25/07/2018 12:46

SomeonesRealName I was answering the question of why a person may not agree to a divorce. If their spouse wants a divorce they (the spouse) will eventually get one without their consent (after 5 years) but they at least will have kept to the vows they took before God. Agreeing to a divorce will be breaking those vows.