The announcement that civil partnerships are to be extended to mixed-sex couples has been met with mixed reactions. There are those who are wholly in favour, and there are those who think there is no need as mixed-sex couples have, for centuries, been able to get married, and that now that there is marriage equality in England, Wales and Scotland, civil partnerships should be withdrawn.
Two sisters are now calling on the government to extend mixed-sex civil partnerships to siblings. Catherine and Virginia Utley have lived together for over 30 years, bought a house together and have jointly raised Catherine’s daughter. When one of them dies, the other faces a large Inheritance Tax bill, which will probably mean she will have to sell the home they have lived in and shared for over 23 years. They want to be able to enter into a civil partnership with each other to be able to benefit from the Inheritance Tax advantages that are available to couples in either a civil partnership or marriage. The sisters have said that they feel excluding siblings from civil partnerships is “pure discrimination”.
Read more: Could Civil Partnerships be extended to Siblings?
Divorce is a very difficult and distressing life-event, and people are quite often emotionally fragile and hurt; sometimes this leads to anger and the inability to think clearly, and logic and common sense often disappear out of the window. Anyone who has been divorced will likely have a story to tell that will make people gasp in surprise, but some disputes and demands made during the divorce are extraordinary. Here is a small selection:
The casserole dish
A divorcing couple had almost sorted out their division of assets and belongings save for a single casserole dish. It was not valuable and held no sentimental value to either the wife or the husband. For some reason, the husband decided that he wanted the casserole dish and proceeded to send his wife a number of aggressive letters about the ovenware. Eventually, she got so fed up with his constant demands, she took an axe to the dish, chopped it in half, swept up half the broken bits into a box, gift-wrapped the box and handed them to the husband. He never mentioned the casserole dish again.
The Felt-Tip pens
In the midst of a protracted and bitter divorce dispute, the wife’s solicitor sent a strongly worded letter to the husband, demanding the immediate return of some felt-tip pens. The husband obliged; the felt-tip pens had dried out long ago and were of no use to him anyway.
It is widely believed that David Gauke, the Justice Secretary, will be shortly launching an official consultation on divorce reforms, including the introduction of “no-fault divorce”.
There has been a very vocal campaign over the last few years from Resolution, The Times newspaper, legal bloggers, and others for the Government to overhaul the current divorce legislation and to do away with the need for one party to apportion blame on the other in a divorce petition. According to divorce lawyers, the blame game can increase hostility between a divorcing couple and negatively impact on discussions about the couple’s children and the financial settlement. This criticism is backed up by The Finding Fault research report, which concluded that the current 50-year-old legislation is out of step with modern families and 21st Century life.
Current divorce law means that a couple must be separated for 2 years or more to start the divorce process if they do not wish to use fault in their divorce petition. If one party doesn’t agree to a divorce on the grounds of 2 years separation, then the other spouse is potentially faced with waiting for a period of 5 years of separation before being able to start proceedings. It is these long periods of waiting that force many couples into using unreasonable behaviour to enable them to start the divorce process sooner rather than waiting for those very long separation periods to complete.
Read more: No-Fault Divorce will end the blame game and allow couples to divorce with dignity
Social Media is now a part of our everyday lives; on the one hand, it allows people to connect with each other across the world, provides a window into each other’s lives, and opens us up to new opportunities and challenges. On the other hand, however, it can become a festering cesspit of accusations, lies, half-truths and used as a platform on which to wage a war of reprisal against a former spouse or partner. Our tips on how to use – and not use – social media during a divorce or separation will help you divorce with dignity
1 – Do change your passwords. This is an important measure to take on all social media and email accounts for your own security. If the break-up has been less than amicable, then you need to make sure that your ex doesn’t have any access to your personal social media and email accounts. If you know your ex’s passwords, do not be tempted to use them to log into their accounts.
2 – Don’t spy on your ex. However tempting this might be, all it will do is cause you more pain and distress. You may wish to consider blocking him or her and any of their close friends – this will give you some space in your digital life and means that you can focus on you and your life without having posts from your ex pop up in your timeline.
3 – Don’t bad-mouth your ex. This applies particularly if you have children together – your relationship with each other may have ended, but your children’s relationship with their other parent hasn’t. Don’t post anything negative about your ex as your children may read it and find it hurtful. This also applies to other family members and close friends who love both of you; it would be unfair to force them to take sides.
Read more: Dos and Don’ts of using social media during a divorce
Middle-aged people are increasingly choosing to live together rather than get married. This is especially noticeable within the 50-64 age group of people who have never married, where cohabitating relationships are increasing year on year. In 2002, just 6.1% of those in the 50-64 age group who had never married were in a cohabiting relationship. However, in 2017, this figure rose sharply to 12.9%. 1
Family law solicitors are explaining that the increase is most likely due to fears held by one or both parties that, if they marry, they would lose a substantial amount of their assets and wealth in a future divorce settlement.
Cohabiting couples are not afforded the same legal protection as married couples in the event of the relationship ending. The myth of common-law marriage persists and often leads unmarried couples to wrongly assume they will be able to claim a share of assets owned by their partner should they separate. When an unmarried couple separate, they will each keep any assets and bank accounts that are in their own names. If there are any jointly owned assets, then the law will assume that each party has an equal share of ownership and that the assets should be shared accordingly. Some provision is made for couples with young children under section 1 of The Children Act 1989 – but this offers no permanent solution for the parent living with the children.
Read more: The number of middle-aged people who are cohabiting is on the increase
