I met my DP after his marriage brake down, EXW now divorceing on grounds of Adultry

[Ticktock1]

Hi
My DP's marriage ended 18 months ago, he is now getting divorced.

We have been together around 1 year but EXW is now claiming divorce on the grounds of adultry because they are legally still married so DP being in a relationship with me is adultry. Can she do that?

It seems wrong that you can leave and it could take over a year to get the other person to agree to a divorce and at no point are you allowed to meet someone else or move on with your life.

I have no idea if she is naming me on the divorce, can I do anything about that? I don't want to be listed saying I broke up their marriage when I did not know them when they parted!

Many thanks for your help

Oh dear - well technically yes he is commiting adultery with you so yes she could divorce on that basis. She may argue that for 6 months she was going to resume the rtelationship but it was hi relationship with you that caused the marriage to break down finally. I know it doesn't seem very fair. As you dp got a solicitor yet? He needs one asap and then can see what can be done. I think divorcing in this way is likely to be unnecessarily confrontational but there's no reasoning with some people.

Yes, you can do something about that - you can not respond and entirely ignore any paperwork that comes to you. That way you won't be named.

My ex ran off with someone else, he admitted adultery on the petition, she was named as co-respondent but the judge removed it as she had not acknowledged the paperwork (as she doesn't have to).

So just don't respond.

In 6 months time they can go for a no-fault divorce as they will have been separated for 2 years.

Is there a reason she wants to go for adultery now? It's not really a big deal these days. Most marriages that break-down involve adultery somewhere along the line, whether it's before or after the married couple actually separate. What is she hoping to gain by using adultery as the reason for marital breakdown? It's unlikely to get her more money.

If she starts being funny then you will need a solicitor, but if they can agree amicably they can do most of the divorce work themselves with the support of the staff at the family court. The Courts prefer this option as it saves both time, money and heartache, so they are very supportive of couples who can put together their own divorce settlements.

As Northerlurker has said, technically he is committing adultery. Hopefully she would have been advised by her solicitor not to name the co-respondent (you) as that just stirs matters up and can cause delays and add to costs.

It would be far more amicable to wait until they have been separated for two years and go ahead on that ground.

Thank you so much for all your speedy replys. No DP currently doesn't have a solicitor as he doesn't have much money.

I am not sure why she has chosen adultry and to be honest I don't know if she has named me, its just something I am concerned about. Great advice about ignoreing the papers if she does.

The strange thing is that she had a boyfriend (addmittedly breifly) after they split up too!

It was something I had never thought of. DP just wants the divorce to go through so said to me he is willing to just sign to it to make it cheaper and easier.

Does the grounds for your divorce effect you in anyway after divorce?

Onec again thanks for your replys

Also sorry about all of the spelling mistakes!

No, the grounds do not have any effect after divorce. She may think that she will get a bigger financial settlement by going for adultery but she is wrong.

Most solicitors advise you not to name the co -respondent _ I did because she actually did break up our marriage.

RedHelenB I can totally understand in that circumstance and am very sorry you went through that.

I think yes it maybe down to thinking she will get more. If it does not effect anything in life after the divorce then I guess I shouldn't worry so much. Think the idea of it just makes me feel a bit strange and like I'm doing something wrong if that makes sense. It doesn't seem to bother DP he is just greatful that it is finally moving forward.

Once again thank you all so much for your helpful replys

the only faint possibility IME is that relying on adultery is more likely to result in a costs order for the petitioner on the divorce - but that only applies to the actual costs of getting the decree nisi and decree absolute - not to any costs of the financial matters.

Makes no difference to the financial side of things. My DP's ex also did this, like you I was not the cause of the marriage breakdown and DP's ex had been having an on-off affair for months before I came along. Now (5 years on) there are repercussions as she has told both children and anyone who will listen that I broke up the marriage. If the divorce petition reflected the truth I would feel much more secure in our ability to put things straight. I can't do that and it really upsets me as DP's eldest is questioning the person she thought I was, despite both DP and I giving true accounts of the situation (we have one muddled up 11 yo right now). So personally if you can I would resist allowing your 'adultery' to be on the petition.

If you've not been separated for two years yet, the only options are unreasonable behaviour and adultery. Some people feel that putting adultery involves less shit stirring, hurt and dragging up the past than petitioning on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour. I've heard of people who want a quick divorce agreeing that one of them will admit to adultery when they never actually committed it (Noel Gallagher apparently did this with Meg Matthews). The fact that your DP wants to agree to the petition suggests this might be the best way forward. If she wants a divorce asap then there's no way for her to get one without slagging him off, basically. It's one of the flaws of the system.

Saying that, XW is being more combative than she needs to be by naming you on the petition. I wonder if she does have a solicitor, because a decent one would've tried very hard to dissuade her and would've disabused her of any notion that it would get her a bigger financial settlement.

The grounds for divorce can have an effect in the future if you and your partner want to marry in a church. Churches these days do allowed divorcees to marry in church but not if the divorce was because of adultery and they are marrying the person that they committed adultery with.

Many, many years ago late-husband's exW wanted to name me as the co-respondent in her divorce petition. I met him months after the split - but to cite 'adultery' was her way of not accepting any part in the break-up.

She couldn't prove adultery because we had separate dwellings and I was actually a virgin when I married late-hubby 5 years later! But she made us wait 5 years for a divorce when late-hubby and I wouldn't agree to sign something that simply wasn't true.

Actually, it was 4.5 years because late-hubby eventually decided to file for divorce on the grounds of 'unreasonable behaviour' and her own adulterous behaviour and domestic violence would have come out. Nobody wanted the 3 DCs to know that so she soon changed her mind and divorced with consent.

Churches vary. The rule you talk about applies only to the CofE. Even there, some vicars will still conduct the ceremony regardless of the official policy of the church. In other denominations it is generally up to the individual minister, apart from the Catholic church which is, I believe, more restrictive.

Catholic churches do sometimes allow divorcees to marry in church. It does seem to be dependent on whether the divorced partner is at "fault" though.

Friend of DH was allowed to remarry in Catholic church as his first wife left him and no adultery or unreasonable behaviour was involved. I think it is left up to the conscience of the individual priest.

Carrots, it is up to the view of the BISHOP for the diocese. Individual priests are not allowed to make such decisions themselves.

Oh I see. Hadn't realised they had such hoops to jump through.

Are you sure it wasn't an annulment Carrots?

OP, why is your DP waiting for his ex to do the paperwork? He could file for divorce on grounds of unreasonable behaviour instead of leaving it to her to be the petitioner.

Agree it is a flaw of the system that you essentially have to slag the other person off if you want it done quickly (without waiting for 2 years separation). But you can be quite vague in your reasons and there's a lot of scope for what is 'unreasonable'--a judge isn't generally going to say 'oh I think that's reasonable so you have to stay married'. 'Unreasonable' is whatever you're unable to live with in a partner, it doesn't matter much if other people might be willing to put up with it!

She can claim costs if it's adultery. Could that be why?

Are you sure it wasn't an annulment Carrots?

I wondered that too. Our priest pushed me to get my first marriage annulled because he said it was the only way I would be able to marry again in the Catholic church bar death.

Don't think it was, Kladdkaka, as the priest spoke about the whole subject of christian charity and forgiveness and that DH's friend was being allowed a new start after the mistakes of his first marriage. I don't think he would have phrased it in that way if his first marriage had been declared to have never existed.

I got ex to divorce me for adultery, there are no repercussions. I hadn't done anything till after we split, but cos we shared the house for a year after separation we were advised we might not be able to prove it, especially as it was totally amicable, so would have to wait ages for divorce otherwise.