English court rules woman must stay in 'loveless' marriage

English court rules woman must stay in 'loveless' marriage

English court rules woman must stay in 'loveless' marriage

An "unhappy" British woman who wants to divorce her husband of 40 years has lost a Supreme Court appeal. She must now wait until 2020 for the marriage to end on the grounds that they will have been separated for five years.

'The Majority Invite Parliament to Consider Replacing the Law'Supreme Court President Lady Hale.

Following the ruling, the Ministry of Justice said: "The current system of divorce creates unnecessary antagonism in an already hard situation". But Mr Owens refuses to divorce her, denying his wife's allegations about his behaviour.

His colleague Lady Hale said she found the case very troubling, but that it was not for judges to change the law.

The couple married in 1978 and have lived in Broadway, Worcestershire, ever since.

Mrs Owens had been refused a divorce at first instance, because the judge found that the examples of her husband's behaviour which she provided were "flimsy" and could not have caused the judge to conclude that her marriage had broken down irretrievably.

When she petitioned for divorce, millionaire mushroom farmer Mr Owens, 80, denied her complaints about him, saying he had forgiven the affair and she was just "bored".

"Mrs Owens is devastated by this decision, which means that she can not move forward with her life and obtain her independence from Mr Owens", he said, adding that the public would find the court's decision "hard to understand".

The justices analysed the rival legal arguments, which revolved around concepts of "unreasonable" behaviour and "fault", at a hearing in London in May. Tini petitioned for divorce in 2015 after moving out.

More news: Suspect arrested in Oakland train station stabbing attack
More news: White Helmets have no place in Syria now, expert notes
More news: Map: Syrian forces control the bordering areas with Occupied Golan Heights

One, Lord Wilson, said justices had ruled against Mrs Owens "with reluctance".

Meanwhile Mr Owens's representative Peter Jackson, told the publication in a statement that his client shouldn't be "unfairly criticised for attempting to save his marriage". But she said reforming the current fault-based system is only part of the issue facing the 110,000 couples who divorced each year in England.

Family law experts say the ruling shows there is a "divorce crisis" and called for the introduction of "no fault" splits.

"It is likely that significant numbers of married observers of non-Judeo- Christian faiths are also in a similar position to members of the Muslim community", she said.

He added: "It should not be for any husband or wife to "prove" blame as the law requires many to do - this is archaic, creates needless conflict, and has to change".

Mrs Owens' lawyers had suggested a "modest shift" of focus in interpretation of legislation was required.

She says he has behaved unreasonably and that she should be allowed to end her marriage. Hugh Owens was represented by Nigel Dyer QC and Hamish Dunlop (instructed by Hughes Paddison).

Freedom to marry and divorce are both guaranteed by the law, but partners must uphold the "dignity of marriage", Li said.

Recommended News

We are pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news.
Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper.
Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.