One of my jobs at Stowe Family Law is to carry out file reviews. Every month I pore over each file’s contents, read the correspondence, look at the documents and think long and hard about the best course of action for that case. It is a task that many lawyers loathe, because of its intensive nature, but it has to be done.

I have noticed that the amount of email correspondence continues to increase. This may be because our clients are scattered far and wide – our International Family Law Department is particularly busy at the moment; we are also seeing plenty of new clients from London and the South East – but it certainly appears that emails are here to stay.

Email has its advantages, but also creates challenges. Face-to-face meetings, which I far prefer, tend to give us all the chance to air our thoughts in more detail and in “real time.” Emails usually refer to one point in the entire case, and so make it easy to ignore the bigger picture.

If you are currently going through divorce, remember to use email wisely and respect the power that it has to change a situation, swiftly and suddenly. One Stowe Family Law client was libelled by his wife to the entire staff of an international organisation by email. It cost her dearly in the divorce – and nearly cost him his job.

With that episode in mind, I thought I would list ten pointers on email correspondence for the benefit of those who are going through divorce, or considering it. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but does include examples of the potential pitfalls of email and how best to avoid them:

Continue reading »

If one party wants the divorce to be finalised but the other does not, and the parties’ finances have not been resolved, may the decree absolute be delayed?

Let’s begin with the basics. The divorce process in England is conducted in three stages:

1. The issue of a divorce petition.
2. The grant of a divorce decree nisi by the court.
3. Obtaining a certificate of decree absolute from the court office.

The Petitioner, who has initiated the process, files the marriage certificate on issue of the divorce petition. It remains lodged with the court and in return, on decree absolute, the certificate bearing the court seal is the effective “swap.” The parties are legally divorced only when there has been a grant of decree absolute. When a divorced person wishes to remarry, a sealed copy of the decree absolute must be produced as evidence the party is legally free to do so. It is possible to be fully divorced without a financial settlement being resolved.

At decree nisi stage the parties are almost, but not quite, divorced. The parties are still able to change their minds about getting divorced. That is why it is called nisi: the Latin term for “unless.” There is a six week and one day minimum mandatory period between grant of decree nisi and decree absolute, so that if the couple do want to change their minds, they will remain married. It happens rarely – but it does happen. I have one client who has twice obtained decree nisi from her husband, only to backtrack from the point at which the divorce was to be finalised. So it is a worthwhile part of the procedure and serves its purpose.

In most cases, however, too much water has passed under the bridge and the obtaining of decree absolute is public recognition that the parties, who are already divorced in body and mind, are now legally divorced. For most, it is the beginning of a new life and new, guilt-free relationships.

In some cases there is, in fact, a rush to decree absolute. For example, if there is a potential bankruptcy on the horizon and a financial settlement needs to be implemented. Or if there is a new baby on the way, and an urgent need to remarry. I have been involved in one case where in such a case, exceptionally, the mandatory period was shortened.

This post considers the opposite position: when one party does not want to be divorced so long as the finances remain unresolved. Continue reading »

I’m sitting writing this post, looking down the Red Sea’s Gulf of Aqaba (left), with the sun setting on the mountains. I am in Eilat, Israel, for my Passover break and I can’t pretend it’s not wonderful. The weather is beautiful and I’m feeling for my colleagues enduring the weather in North Yorkshire and Cheshire. I know only too well that I will be back soon enough!

The newspapers here have been filled with details about the unfortunate meeting that took place between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama at the White House recently. The blunt question asked by the newspapers: are these two men on the way to divorce?

The meeting didn’t sound too harmonious. Stung by the announcement of building in East Jerusalem (and let’s not go into the whys and wherefores; this isn’t a political post), President Obama is alleged to have gone off to have dinner with his family, leaving the Israeli delegation to stew. Then he wouldn’t take part in a photo call. Relations are at a low ebb. The Israelis aren’t used to this type of treatment and are considering their position.

President Obama is reported to have behaved similarly towards our own Prime Minister Gordon Brown, whom he ultimately agreed to meet in the kitchens of the United Nations in New York after some considerable diplomacy. Or so the newspapers say.

Politics clearly depend a great deal on the politicians and their ability (or otherwise) to hit it off. If they don’t, “divorce” can ensue pretty rapidly and the consequences can be very serious for all of us throughout the world, powerless to do anything to stop the struggle between politicians whose egos have got too big.

Recent news events have had me thinking about how divorce can be made that much more difficult by the personalities of the couple involved. Many couples revert to type. Recently I wrote about the Black Knights of Divorce, and then about the Sirens. Now, writing from Israel, I’d like to mention the David and Goliaths of Divorce. They certainly do exist. Continue reading »

A partnership is broadly defined as members of a common business venture. I like that description, with its emphasis on “business”. Ideally, the client and the family lawyer work together through the legal process until it reaches its natural conclusion. Our relationship throughout is strictly commercial, with input from each partner. Our contributions are naturally different, but more or less equal. Any differences that arise during our joint venture are discussed between us and resolved amicably. The client has the final say. When the “business” has been completed, our partnership has run its course. However, I believe the process isn’t necessarily designed to encourage this idealistic type of partnership. I also believe that it can put serious strains on the solicitor-client relationship at the most vulnerable point in the process, which in some cases can rupture the partnership irreparably.

I have often wondered whether the period between First Appointment and the Financial Dispute Resolution appointment needs to be reconsidered in greater detail. Perhaps an automatically listed hearing could be interjected, to ensure that clients remain fully involved in the case and satisfied with its progress prior to the FDR. Let me explain.

A new client came to see me. She was seeking a second opinion. The client insisted that nothing was wrong, but that she just needed “reassurance”. Continue reading »

What would you like to know about divorce?

Lots of first-time visitors to this blog arrive here after typing their questions about divorce and family law directly into Google and other search engines. Other readers submit enquiries to the comments section, or contact me directly.

Tomorrow (Wednesday 6 January) I will be appearing on the GMTV with Lorraine programme, which begins at 8:35 am, to offer advice to viewers. Tune in for some answers.

If we don’t cover your question, please feel free to add it to the comments at the bottom of this post.

Continue reading »

This is the view of the River Lune from the cemetery in Kirby Lonsdale, Cumbria, North West England. The great art critic and social thinker John Ruskin described the scene as “one of the finest views in England, therefore the world”, when he saw a painting of it by JMW Turner. Thereafter, because the great man went to live in Cumbria, the beauty spot became known as Ruskin’s View, in his honour.

I’ve spent some time recently in Kirby Lonsdale, because it is a gorgeous little place. It’s about two hours drive from my home and – after parking in the Town Square and finding my way to the cemetery (being careful not to slip on the treacherous cobblestones) – gazing out over the stunning sight of Ruskin’s View makes the journey well worthwhile. It’s a beautiful place: easy to relax, wind down and chill out in.

Continue reading »

“Our society in England and Wales now urgently demands a second attempt by Parliament, better than in the ill-fated Part II of the Act of 1996, to reform the five ancient bases of divorce; meanwhile, in default, the courts have set the unreasonableness of the behaviour required to secure the success of a petition on the second basis, namely pursuant to s.1(2)(b) of the Act of 1973, even when defended, at an increasingly low level.” – Wilson LJ in Miller Smith –v- Miller Smith 2009 EWCA 1297

Stowe Family Law represented the successful husband in this case. The judgment of the Court of Appeal, heard before the President and given by Lord Justice Wilson, was handed down today. I will not of course discuss the specific facts of the case and nothing that follows does so. But, on a general note, Miller Smith is a useful example of alternative options available to deal with the financial problems caused by a defended divorce.

In such cases, finances cannot be dealt with in the usual manner, as the brakes are firmly applied until the divorce is out of the way, which could take a very long time. What is one party to do, who wishes to move on with his or her life and finds themselves apparently stymied?

Continue reading »

The latest UK divorce statistics show that a marriage ending in divorce has, on average, lasted 11.7 years. This has given rise to a new term: the “11-year itch”.

So why get married? Because it is still seen as the right thing to do? Because it legitimises children? Because it gives out a strong image of stability?

Why 11 years? Is it because this is the average length of time it takes to become established in a marriage, to have children, for those children to reach school age and for the marriage to go stale?

This could be one explanation – and yet the number of people who are aged 60 or over when they divorce – so-called silver divorce – has also increased. I think it shows a growing attitude in society towards marriage as something that is disposable when it just doesn’t fit anymore. People live longer and life doesn’t necessarily begin at 40 or 50 or even 60. It begins when you, as an individual, make a decision that is about you and how you live your life.

Since 2000 and the case of White v White the courts have been viewing marriage as a business partnership like any other. Think about it this way: Continue reading »

From the comment pages of the Yorkshire Post, 23/10/2009.

Divorced from reality in the 21st century

By Marilyn Stowe

WE should all be raising glasses this week to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Divorce Reform Act 1969 gaining royal assent.

The landmark statute made divorce easier, introducing what became known as “quickie divorces”. It eliminated the previous extensive, fault-based procedure, was a milestone for women’s rights, and its momentous implications are still being felt today.

On the statute’s birthday, however, I am horrified to note that the divorce wind now appears to be blowing in the opposite direction, with prominent commentators suggesting divorce should be made harder and settlements less favourable to ordinary women.    Continue reading >

I was interviewed for a feature in The Mail on Sunday’s YOU magazine, which focused upon “amicable” divorces that descend into bitter battles. I would like to emphasise that not every spouse behaves badly during a divorce; however, some interesting points are made. The feature was published on Sunday 13 September.

Divorce or destruction? When relationships reach the bitterest end

Ending a marriage is never easy – but what happens if the man you once thought was the love of your life turns out to be your worst enemy? Anna Moore looks at the devastation that can be caused when divorce gets messy…

Though Caroline Spencer may be baffled and bewildered by her former husband Earl Spencer’s behaviour during their divorce proceedings this summer, there will be other ex-wives across the country feeling a sorry shiver of recognition.

First, the earl woos and marries Caroline, telling the world, ‘I’ve found somebody I respect and love and I feel deeply happy.’ Then the couple settle into an enviable life, dividing time between their canalside home in Northwest London and the Althorp estate in Northamptonshire, where Caroline soon makes her mark with an annual literary festival.

After the birth of their son, Ned, Caroline declares herself ecstatic, telling one journalist that every day she feels ‘blessed’. When asked about the earl’s track record – his previous messy divorce which ended amid accusations that he was a ‘callous adulterer’ – her reply is unequivocal. ‘I can’t think of anyone less callous,’ she says. ‘Strong, determined, all of those things. But never callous.’

Words that must haunt her now.

Continue reading »