I was reading this news story (BBC)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-44949856
"A woman who wants to divorce her husband on the grounds she is unhappy has lost her Supreme Court appeal.
Tini Owens, 68, from Worcestershire, wanted the court to grant her a divorce from her husband of 40 years Hugh, who is refusing the split.
The Supreme Court unanimously rejected the appeal, meaning she must remain married until 2020."
I understand that the Supreme Court are bound by current divorce legislation, so I am not suggesting they could or should have ruled differently. But, in a wider sense, is there any value in legislation that delays divorce in this way - who will gain from the two year delay?
Why is Tini Owens' husband refusing the divorce (given that it will happen any way in two years' time) when his wife wishes so strongly to be divorced that she has taken the case to the Supreme Court?
Interested to hear any opinions on this.