A few weeks ago, the British newspapers all reported the story of a woman in India who was granted a divorce due to her husband’s refusal to install a toilet in their home.
Every day I get an email from Google News with a summary of various divorce stories from around the world. If the stories are interesting or relevant, then I will usually post a link to them on the various social media platforms that I use. I ignore most of the stories. These days the newsfeed is full of stories about the Brexit “divorce” rather than actual divorces. There are a lot of stories about celebrity divorces (about which I care nothing unless it is actually legal news as opposed to celebrity gossip) and even some clearly fake news breathlessly and falsely reporting that Prince Charles/George Clooney/Barack Obama is getting a divorce from Camilla/Amal/Michelle.
The newsfeed also includes a lot of stories from around the world including a surprisingly high number from India excitedly reporting things like “Now you can get a divorce because” X, Y or Z has happened. They always seem very excited that there is a constant stream of new things that can justify a divorce. I suspect that was the source of the story about the Indian divorce.
I have no idea what the law is about divorce in India, but in England and Wales there is only one ground for divorce. You have to satisfy the court that your marriage has irretrievably broken down. You do this by demonstrating to the court that one of five “Facts” has happened:
- Adultery by your spouse
- Behaviour by your spouse which means that it would be unreasonable to expect you to have to continue living with him or her
- Desertion for a period in excess of 2 years
- Separation for a period of 2 years, with the consent of your spouse
- Separation for a period of 5 years.
Behaviour (commonly and slightly inaccurately often referred to as Unreasonable Behaviour) is probably the most common way to divorce. There are also many adultery divorces. Lawyers (including me) often tut about newspapers using the expression “quickie” divorce, because there is no such thing in this country, but to be honest this is probably what the papers are referring to. Behaviour or adultery divorces are the only ways to get divorced without a lengthy period of at least 2 years’ separation. In that sense, it can be regarded as “quick”, although the divorce process is not likely to be faster now that it would be using one of the other Facts. You can just start it sooner.
The Indian case would easily qualify as the type of behaviour that would justify a divorce in England. O’Neill v O’Neill, a case dating back to 1975 is a clear precedent that inadequate toilet facilities amount to behaviour that would justify a divorce. (The judgement amusingly says that the original trial judge was called His Honour Judge Poison, but sadly on closer inspection this would seem be a typo).
As I have frequently blogged in the past, the fact that is relied on makes no difference to the financial outcome of the divorce, nor does it affect the arrangements for their couple’s children, and it is high time that a less conflict-ridden and more civilised form of no-fault divorce was introduced. It would involve less conflict, but would not make divorce easier as it is already easy.
20 September 2017