The President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, has recently declared 180 divorces to be void. The couples involved are therefore still married and if they have remarried, they may now be guilty of bigamy.
The divorces all involved Italian husbands and wives who paid thousands of Euros to get a quick divorce in England, rather than an even greater sum for a divorce that takes years in Italy. To do this, 179 of spouses declared that they lived at an address in maidenhead, and that they therefore had sufficient domicile and habitual residence to divorce in England. These divorces were then issued at a variety of county courts throughout England and Wales. As divorces are not administered centrally and no database of addresses is maintained so that repeated addresses can be queried, they almost got away with it. However, an eagle-eyed official at Burnley County Court noticed that the same address appeared on two divorce petitions. Investigations revealed that the address was a post office box, which was pithily described by Munby J as being too small for anyone to occupy.
Munby J has declared the divorces to be void. He also remarked that they had almost managed to get away with it as it was possible at that time for anyone wishing to divorce in England and Wales to issue divorce petition at any divorce county court anywhere in England and Wales. He also stated that soon there may be as few as a dozen Family Courts where a divorce can be started and that checks should be introduced.
The reduction in the number of courts where a divorce can begin has nothing to do with these this fraud on the system (the judgement is particularly good and very readable). In April 2014, the county courts’ family jurisdiction and the Family Proceedings Court were abolished and replaced by a new single Family Court. Proceedings will soon only be issued as designated Family Court for the area. For example, if you live in Colchester, a divorce must be issued at the Family Court at Chelmsford.
This does not mean that in future family hearings will only take place at one of these designated Family Courts. The Court will make maximum efficient use of HM Courts & Tribunals Service’s resources and therefore hearings will take place at other court buildings throughout England and Wales. Therefore while a hearing might take place at a Magistrates Court or County Court, it will be a Family Court case.
Munby J’s comments in his judgement should be read in light of his comments a few months ago that divorce should become an administrative process rather than a judicial process. (Read my blog about it here). He has argued that while the Family Court should deal with disputes between parties in family cases about financial issues or children, the actual divorce (i.e. the process of terminating the marriage) should instead be handled by a Registrar of Births, Deaths, Marriages and Divorces.
In my view this makes a great deal of sense, especially if and when no-fault divorce is introduced (as soon or later it surely must be). The divorce part of a divorce is actually the most straightforward bit (albeit it is made needlessly contentious at the moment by the existence of fault-based divorce).
And, to prevent someone fraudulently claiming that the English courts have jurisdiction over then, a divorce petitioner will be expected to show the Registrar his driving licence or other proof of address.
4 October 2014