Our Blogs

If you want to get a divorce but have become estranged from your spouse and no longer know where they live, you’re not alone. This is an extremely common problem and, whilst it’s possible to get a divorce without knowing where your spouse lives, it’s much, much easier to proceed when you’re in possession of this information. So, before you go down this route, try these steps first:

1. Try their old contact details

Wherever possible, it always best to approach your spouse directly. So, whilst you may no longer know where they live, it’s worth trying their old phone number or email address to see if they’re still reachable. Chances are, if you’ve been separated for long enough (which, if you no longer know where each other live, is likely) they’ll probably simply agree to the divorce and you can simply send your completed documents to the court.

2. Ask their friends or family

If you’re attempts to contact your spouse are unsuccessful but you’re still able to contact any of their family, friends or even acquaintances, it’s worth doing so to see if they can provide you with the information you need. We know that the conversation may be uncomfortable, but it’ll make the whole process significantly easier so is certainly worth a try!

3. Check the electoral register

If your spouse has ever registered to vote and they still live in the UK, there’s a good chance you’ll be able to find their current address by looking at the local electoral register.

You can find out where you can view this by contacting your local Electoral Registration Office (you can find yours by clicking here) and then perusing their records.

If this doesn’t reveal your spouse’s current whereabouts, there’s one option left:

4. Consult a private investigator

Whilst this is a last resort, it’s also highly effective. It does, however, have the potential to be extremely expensive so, if you need to instruct a private investigator/detective, make sure that they’re going to keep you updated with the charges you’re accruing regularly.

You should also ensure that they’re a member of The Association of British Investigators. This isn’t going to guarantee that they find your spouse (they could have moved abroad, for example), but it does mean that you’re going to receive a certain level of service.

If you can’t find them

If you exhaust the options described above and find that you still don’t know your spouse’s whereabouts, you’ll need to complete form D13B (otherwise known as a statement to dispense with service of a divorce petition) and submit this to the court along with the usual documents needed to file for a divorce.

If you have any other questions about the divorce process in England and Wales then click here to get in touch with us today.

The mere mention of the word ‘jurisdiction’, particularly when a conversation’s context is geared towards divorce or a similar family law matter, is often enough to cause immense confusion, trepidation and concern. Considering how the vast majority of divorces that receive the press’s attention typically cross borders and are subject to lengthy proceedings as a result, this is understandable. For the vast majority of those seeking a divorce in England or Wales, though, ensuring that the court are able to consider an application for a divorce is actually pretty straightforward.

With that in mind, here are the key things you’ll need to know about jurisdiction in divorce proceedings:

It doesn’t matter where you were married

Often, people assume that the courts in England, Wales – or anywhere else, in fact – are unable to consider their applications because they were not married in that country. Actually, the country within which you were married is not relevant as far as jurisdiction is concerned.

Jurisdiction is determined by residency

Like we’ve said, it’s where you live that determines whether or not the courts have the jurisdiction required to consider your application. Furthermore, only one party needs to reside in either England or Wales.

Either the Petitioner or Respondent can reside abroad

Again, people often assume that both the Petitioner and Respondent will need to reside in England or Wales, but this is not the case.

Furthermore, once this piece of information has been disclosed, it’s then commonly assumed that it must be the Petitioner (the party that formally requests the courts grant a divorce by submitting the relevant documents to the court) that resides in either of these countries. In reality, it doesn’t matter whether it is the Petitioner or Respondent that lives in England or Wales as the court will have jurisdiction in either instance.

The court may still have jurisdiction if you both live abroad

Whilst jurisdiction is usually established via one or both parties living permanently in either England or Wales, there are circumstances under which it’s possible for the courts to have jurisdiction when both parties live abroad.

Provided one party has significant links to either country, then the courts will be able to at least consider their application for a divorce. Owning a property in either jurisdiction would, for example, mean that it was likely the courts would be able to consider that person’s application even if they were largely resident in a different country. Other common links to England or Wales include paying tax here, having family that reside here or having a businesses here.

Sadly, there is no guarantee that a court will agree they have jurisdiction if neither party reside in England or Wales permanently but we think it’s worth knowing that your application will at least be considered under certain circumstances.

Still have questions about jurisdiction in divorce proceedings? Click here to get in touch with our team of advisers today.

Everyone knows that children’s rights to have a relationship with both of their parents is enshrined in law. Indeed, the only circumstances under which a judge would deny one parent contact with their child would be because doing so was likely to adversely affect the child’s wellbeing.

Indeed, even such concerns often lead judges to instead offer applicants wishing to spend time with their children supervised contact initially, often in the hope that this will lead to unsupervised contact, overnight stays etc. For Grandparents, uncles, aunties and other relatives, though, it’s not so simple.

Should anyone other than a child’s mother or father wish to request that a court grant them a contact or residency order, then they must first request the court’s permission before their application is even considered. Most people would, I believe, agree with claims that denying a grandparent contact with their grandchild is just as heinous as preventing a mother or father from seeing their child. Additionally, I think most of us would agree that regular contact with grandparents is in a child’s best interests. Take these factors into consideration and it’s clear why a child’s right to see their grandparents, and the possibility of this being enshrined in law, is being so widely debated at the moment.

This particular issue was discussed in parliament just last week and, if reports are to be believed, a change to existing law has cross-party support. That said, no politician or political party is going to do anything other than support such a matter at these early stages when there’s little at stake. Should MPs be asked to vote on the matter, this may well change. The fact that the UK’s family courts are near breaking point is now common knowledge and opening them up to a potentially large number of additional matters is only going to make this worse.

Still, it cannot be denied that, morally speaking and provided there’s no good reason for contact not to be exercised, any new or amended law that helped estranged grandparents see their grandchildren would be an overwhelmingly good thing; particularly as the vast majority of applications would be resolved before it became necessary for a judge to rule on them.

The key question here is actually the extent to which it would be practicable to open these applications. It’s quite reasonable to say that grandparents should be allowed to make such an application but should this also apply to uncles, aunties, siblings, cousins etc.? Let us know your thoughts by leaving a comment below.

There is little reason to allow people to defend divorce applications filed by their spouses, an influential foundation has claimed.

The Nuffield Foundation, a charitable trust that conduct studies and research designed to promote social well-being throughout the UK, recently conducted a study, with the help of Exeter University, designed to provide insight into why individuals choose to defend divorces and what affect this has on the UK’s courts. Sufficed to say, their findings not only suggest that defended divorces should be abolished, but also added further weight to claims that no-fault divorce should be introduced to the UK.

The study found that, rather than defending applications because they did not want their marriages to end, divorces were usually defended because the respondent simply wanted to contest the grounds and apportion blame on their spouse instead of accept it themselves. Researchers correctly pointed out that, as the courts cannot actually rule on who is at fault for the breakdown of the marriage, defended divorces are clogging up the UK’s already overstretched family courts.

The study also revealed that due to expense, emotional ramifications and discouragement from various institutions operating within the field of family law, the vast majority of people decide against defending divorce applications.

The study’s author, Professor Liz Trinder, claimed that her findings served to reinforce the widely held belief that the need to blame one spouse for the breakdown of a marriage is unhelpful and often both unfair and even harmful to the parties involved, including children.

She further argues that divorce law is now more than 50 years old and that reform is urgently needed, that our courts cannot investigate why a marriage has broken down and, furthermore, recognise that attempting to do so is simply not possible.

Ultimately both Professor Trinder and the Nuffield Foundation’s Chief Executive Tim Gardam argue that the current system encourages spouses to blame one another when this is unproductive and is a matter on which the courts simply cannot rule.

They go on to claim that there is an evident need to remove both fault-based and defended divorces from UK law in order to create a system that is more child-friendly and geared towards ‘reducing conflict and promoting resolution’.

What do you think? Should no-fault divorce be introduced? Is contesting a divorce ultimately a fruitless endeavour? Let us know by leaving a comment below.

Do you have questions about divorce? Get in touch with our advisers for free advice today.

With the party that files for the divorce also usually the one that pays the court’s fee of £550, it’s not surprising that, when a married couple separates because one party committed adultery, it’s the spouse that committed the offence that looks to apply for the divorce in order to shoulder this cost. Unfortunately, this inevitably causes problems.

Unfortunately, when any of the three fault based grounds (adultery, unreasonable behaviour or desertion) are cited as the reason for a marriage irretrievably having broken down, the petitioner (the individuals that formally requests the divorce) must state that they find it intolerable to remain married to the respondent (the party not filing for divorce).

Because of this, it is not possible for someone to file for a divorce whilst relying on their own adultery. By doing this, the petitioner would essentially be claiming that they could no longer reasonably be expected to remain married to the respondent as a result of their own actions – something which the courts will not accept.

When couples find themselves in this situation, they’re usually left with two options: the ‘victim’ of the adultery can file for the divorce or the adulterer can file on the grounds of their spouse’s unreasonable behaviour. The former is problematic because the ‘victim’ of the adultery feels that they should not pay the court’s fees. The latter can cause problems when the ‘victim’ feels they should not be blamed for the breakdown of the marriage or because they simply have not behaved unreasonably.

Under such circumstances, the logical solution is actually pretty simple: the party that committed the adultery can pay their spouse the fees in question before they file for the divorce. Whilst this would mean that the couple could obtain a divorce on the grounds of adultery, that the appropriate party would be blamed for the breakdown of the marriage and that the person that committed the adultery would foot the bill for the court’s fees, there is still one hurdle that’d need to be cleared: a lack of trust.

Once it becomes necessary for the parties to exchange money before the process has even begun it is, in our experience at least, normal for a lack of trust to cause delays. If the parties are still on relatively good terms, this can usually be overcome with little more than simple reassurance. When the relationship has become more fraught, though, the thought of simply handing over several hundred pounds is met with trepidation and a standoff usually ensues.

One possible solution here is that the petitioner files for the divorce under the proviso that, following them having received correspondence from the court (and therefore proof that the request was filed and the fee paid), the respondent repays them. In this instance, the petitioner can seek added security by requesting that the courts order the respondent to return these fees to them by ticking the relevant box in section 11 of their Divorce Petition meaning that they can then pursue repayment through the small claims court if necessary. This arrangement should also suit the respondent as they will not be pursued by the court in any way unless the petitioner authorises the necessary proceedings.

Do you have further questions about getting a divorce on the grounds of adultery? Then get in touch with Quickie Divorce’s friendly and knowledgeable advisors today.

If you’re considering a divorce, you’ve probably done some research and, if you have, you’ve probably come across the term DIY divorce. The abbreviation is largely self-explanatory, of course, but, if you’re genuinely considering doing your own divorce, we think it’s important that you fully understand the advantages and drawbacks of a DIY divorce.

As a result, we’re going to prepare two separate articles, the first of which will discuss the advantages of doing your own divorce:

1. The Cost

It’ll probably come as no surprise but most people that choose to do their own divorces cite savings as their main motivation for doing so. Solicitors charge several hundred pounds per hour, after all, so it’s not hard to see why.

It’s worth noting that you’ll still be required to pay a fee to the court unless you’re exempt, however.

2. Speed

You’d think that a divorce that is administered and handled by a solicitor with both training and experience in family law would certainly be processed quicker than one you do yourself, but you’d be wrong.

Remember that solicitors deal with multiple cases at any given time, whilst you can give your application your full attention. This means that – day-to-day responsibilities aside – you’ll be able to complete and return correspondence, contact the court and do everything needed to expedite the end of your marriage as quickly as possibly far more swiftly that a solicitor.

3. Convenience

Not only do solicitors have to juggle several clients at once, they also rigidly adhere to standard office hours – something which isn’t suited to the modern world.

Do your own divorce, and office hours aren’t going to inhibit its progress. You can deal with things in your own time and as quickly or as slowly as you like.

4. Harmony

Sadly, with most solicitors charging an hourly rate, it’s in their interests to prolong matters and generate larger bills. Did you know, for example, that solicitors are more commonly referred to as ‘fee-earners’ within their firms?

As far as divorces are concerned, the most obvious way to prolong proceedings is to ‘poke holes’ in agreements that spouses have reached between them such as, say, who keeps the family home, how pensions are to be divided etc. This leads to negotiations which take time and, of course, inflate your bill.

If you’re doing your own divorce, an agreement that suits the needs of both parties can be made binding with relative ease.

5. Control

Put simply, you’re the one in control. You’ll know exactly what’s been written in your various documents, what the courts are being told, when everything’s been filed and so on. In my experience, this makes the divorce process less anxiety-inducing.

After a divorce has been finalised, it’s all too easy to get caught up in excitement, relief, hope or any other number of emotions. Sadly, this means that people regularly forget that there are a number of things they’ll need to take care of as a result of their marriage having been legally dissolved.

With this in mind, Quickie Divorce thought we’d provide you with what are, in our opinion, the five most important things you’ll need to do after your divorce:

Update your will

You’d assume that any claim your former spouse had to your estate is dissolved along with your marriage, but it’s sadly more complicated than that.

If your will was prepared during your marriage, it’ll remain legally valid until you update it. We’re assuming that your spouse is the main beneficiary of this so you’re going to need to amend it if you want to ensure that the right party/parties inherit your estate.

Contact the Department of Work and Pensions

If you receive benefits of any kind, you should contact the Department of Work and Pensions and inform them of your new marital status immediately.

It’s entirely possible that nothing will change but, once it’s done, you can rest assured that you won’t be accused of benefit fraud and have to deal with all of the nasty consequences that come with it.

Contact your Service Providers

Following your divorce having been finalised, you should check your old records and if any accounts of any kind are still in both your and your former spouse’s name, contact the provider and request that either you or they be removed from the account accordingly.

Tell your Insurers

With a divorce bringing such significant change, it’s only logical to conclude it could affect any number of insurance policies.

Granted, some are far more likely to be affected than others (life and medical policies are the most obvious examples) but we’d recommend you check any policy you have just in case.

Change your Name

If you took your spouse’s name following your marriage, you’re going to need to get a document called a Deed Poll in order to prove that you’re now divorced and that your name’s changed so that service providers, your local authority, the DVLA etc. can update their records accordingly.

Yes, some organisations will accept your Decree Absolute as proof of the fact that your name’s changed but some won’t and, as you can prepare your own Deed Poll (you can find instructions here), we think getting one is a no-brainer.

Divorce relying on unreasonable behaviour is, as we’ve stated previously, something that many people misunderstand. It leads people to conclude that they need to cite heinous and abhorrent examples of their spouse’s behaviour when they really don’t need to. As we appreciate that thinking of examples can be extremely problematic (and last month’s post was so popular) we thought we’d provide five more common examples of unreasonable behaviour regularly accepted by courts in England and Wales:

Disregarding Opinions

Respect is a bedrock upon which all stable and effective relationships are formed. From workmates to friends to spouses, relationships that lack respect are intolerable.

The difference with the two former examples is that, if you believe either don’t respect you or your opinion, you can put distance between you. When it comes to your spouse, though, this simply isn’t an option.

In spite of this, you’d be surprised how common it is for people to find themselves feeling that their spouse no longer regards their opinions or thoughts to be valid. If you feel that your spouse disregards your thoughts and opinions, you have a solid example of unreasonable behaviour.

Refusing to Compromise

No one likes to compromise. After all, when we do, we’re making a sacrifice of some kind. Compromise, though, like respect, is key to a successful marriage.

If you feel like your spouse continuously wants things their own way and never puts you first, this is also an example of unreasonable behaviour the courts are certain to deem acceptable.

Lack of Intimacy

Intimate acts are, ultimately, the key difference between close friendships and romantic relationships. Yes, it’s reasonable to expect one spouse’s expectations concerning the frequency with which such acts occur to differ from the other but, should these expectations differ dramatically, the relationship is likely to struggle.

So, if one spouse persistently refuses the other’s advances, or failed to respond to requests for increased intimacy, this can be used as an example of unreasonable behaviour.

Starting a Family

Many people consider starting a family to be one of the main reasons for getting married, yet it’s surprising how often a couple agree on whether they do or don’t want children only for one party to then change their minds.

Considering that agreeing to this is certain to have significantly influenced the affected party’s decision to marry their spouse in the first place, it isn’t hard to see why this would be deemed unreasonable.

Excessive use of Gadgets

Over the last decade, gadgets have come to play an even more prominent role in our lives and, as Quickie Divorce have discovered, have also developed into the scourge of many a marriage.

Yes, more and more divorce petitions citing unreasonable behaviour are referring to gadgets such as smartphones and tablets and the fact that spouses seem to prefer to use these to play games or browse the internet than have a conversation with their spouses.

If you feel this is a problem in your marriage and your attempts to communicate this to your spouse have not yielded a change in their behaviour, this is also an acceptable example of unreasonable behaviour when filing for a divorce.

We and many other companies operating within the realm of family law have been calling for the introduction of no-fault divorce for several years now. Currently, couples that agree to a divorce but that are unwilling or unable to rely on adultery or unreasonable behaviour are required to wait until they have been separated for at least two years – a fact that led the current President of the Family Division of the High Court of England and Wales to claim that the law as it stands ‘leaves people trapped in loveless marriages’.

If you find yourself in this situation, what can you do? Well, luckily, if you want to create a formal agreement regarding your children and assets, you can get what’s called a separation agreement. This, whilst not a court order and therefore not legally binding, does form a contract and can therefore be highly persuasive if either party reneges on it and court proceedings are required.

Separation agreements can be used to address any number of the issues that arise when a marriage comes to an end including the division of property, pensions, savings and residency arrangements for children. Furthermore, any separation agreement produced can be converted into a consent order and made legally binding when you are able to file for a divorce.

Also, whilst you’re waiting until two years have elapsed, you may find yourself refraining from beginning any new relationships for fear that you’ll be committing adultery. Technically, should you have a sexual relationship with someone whilst still married, this would count as adultery, but this doesn’t mean you’ll suffer any legal detriment as a result.

Firstly, in order for any divorce reliant on adultery to be successful, it’s necessary to prove that the adultery in question is the reason why the divorce is being sought and must have taken place before you and your spouse separated as a result. If a separation agreement has been obtained prior to any new relationship commencing then this will serve as proof of the fact that this is not the case.

Ultimately, the most important thing that you can do if you need to wait before applying for a divorce is to accept that your life has changed and to adjust accordingly. Realise that your living arrangements are likely to change; that you and your spouse will need to produce co-parenting schedules; that you’ll be surviving on one income – and embrace them. The sooner you do, the sooner you’ll adapt to your new life and the divorce itself, when you’re able to obtain it, will be little more than a formality.

As we live in a world that is becoming more and more globalised, it’s understandable that a large number of people contact Quickie Divorce wanting to know if divorces that they’ve been granted in other countries will be recognised in the UK.

Whilst it is by no means easy to determine whether such divorces granted will be recognised by the UK’s authorities, there are a few things you can ask yourself that will help you ascertain whether or not your divorce is likely to be recognised here:

Was it granted in an EU-member state

Any nation that is a member of the European Union will be required to have a formal legal system that can produce binding orders and that utilises formal procedures with regards to legal matters.

As a result, if you applied for and were granted a divorce within any country that was a member of the European Union at the time of your application, it will almost certainly be recognised in the UK.

How formal was the procedure?

If your divorce was granted outside of the European Union, you should consider the process you were required to follow. Was it formal? Were you required to submit documents? Was your application reviewed before your request for a divorce was approved?

In order for a divorce to be recognised in the UK, it is vital that a formal procedure of some kind was followed and that the divorce is also recognised within the nation within which it was granted.

Were both spouses aware?

Generally speaking, if only one party was involved in the application, the divorce is unlikely to be recognised in the UK as, under these circumstances, the other party would not have been presented with the opportunity to defend the application.

Was at least one spouse connected to the relevant country?

As obvious as it may seem, at least one spouse will need to have either been residing in the relevant country at the time the divorce application was filed or, alternatively, have been born there or have some other substantial link to the country in question for any divorce to be valid.

What to do if you’re unsure

If you’re unsure of the validity of your divorce, it’s highly advisable that you seek legal advice.

Failing to do so can potentially bring about problems when remarrying, amending wills, claiming inheritance and more. Yes, seeking legal advice can prove to be expensive, but not doing so could prove to be much costlier in the long run.

Considering that it could save them hundreds or even thousands of pounds, it’s hardly surprising that more and more people are now opting to get a divorce online. Sadly, though, there are circumstances under which an online divorce simply isn’t the right choice.

The purpose of this article, though, is not only to highlight some of the most common circumstances under which online divorce isn’t suitable but to also to point out that there are still lower-cost alternative available and that – whilst you may not be able to use our services – you won’t necessarily have to spend a fortune in solicitors’ fees.

1. You and your spouse don’t agree to the divorce

If your spouse doesn’t consent to the divorce then the first thing we’d recommend you do is get together in an informal, neutral setting and discuss why. You may find that they’re reluctance to proceed isn’t because they don’t want the marriage to end but because they’re concerned about potential claims against, say, their pension or other assets.

If this is the case and you don’t want to make a claim, you can allay their concerns by informing them of the fact that you can file a Consent Order during your divorce and that this will make any agreement you have legally binding. In other words, by agreeing to the divorce, they can ensure that your agreement – whether it’s that you’ll claim nothing, a small portion of their pension, split the proceeds from the sale of the family home 50/50 or anything else – is finalised and that no further claims can be made.

Should they feel that the marriage isn’t yet over, it’s probably worth letting them tell you why they think this is and possibly even attending marriage counselling. If it’s successful, you won’t need a divorce and, if it isn’t, your spouse will be far more likely to see that ending the marriage is best for all concerned.

2. You can’t agree on how to divide finances

It’s not entirely necessary to reach an agreement on how to divide assets like houses, pensions, savings etc. before obtaining a divorce, but it’s highly advisable that you do.

As we’ve mentioned previously, you can finalise any agreement you reach during the divorce process itself. We strongly recommend that this is done as it affords the parties greater security and peace of mind. So, if you and your spouse can’t agree you should try mediation before you both negotiate via solicitors.

Mediation is significantly cheaper than negotiating an agreement via solicitors. It’s also non-confrontational and, as a mediator can work for both spouses (unlike solicitors who can only represent one party) they don’t benefit from promoting disagreement.

If you can reach an agreement through mediation, you’ll then be able to use an online divorce service. We’ll even be able to prepare the documentation you’ll need to formalise the agreement in court.

3. You don’t know where your spouse is

If you don’t know where your spouse lives, we’d recommend that you contact your friends and relatives to see if they can provide you with this information or, failing that, let you know their contact details so you can get in touch with them and ask them yourself.

You can also try a private investigator who’ll usually be able to track someone down with just their name and an old address. The fee for this is usually competitive, too.

Divorce courts throughout England and Wales have, along with all public services, been subjected to significant reductions in funding for approaching a decade. As a result, as of 2011, steps have been taken to encourage divorcing couples to use mediation to resolve contentious issues through mediation rather than the courts.

This, coupled with the fact that this requirement became more robustly policed after 2014, has led to the proliferation of a myth concerning divorce law, specifically that no application for a divorce will be considered until the couple in question have attended mediation. Something which is simply not true.

Firstly, couples are not required to attend mediation at all before applying for a divorce. Mediation must be attempted in order to try and resolve matters that the court can rule on such as, say, the division of properties or pensions. When an application for a divorce is filed, nothing is contested. It can be contested by the Respondent but this is rare and there is no need for anyone to have attended mediation before they file their Divorce Petition as a result.

Another common misunderstanding is that Consent Orders (you may know them as a Clean Break) will not be approved unless the agreements outlined within have been formulated during mediation sessions. As the purpose of a Consent Order is simply to make agreements legally binding, though, this is not the case. Any agreement, whether reached via the parties unassisted, with the help of a mediator or any other third party will be considered. It is possible that the judge may request written statements from the parties or ask them to attend a hearing in the event that they feel that the agreement is unfairly skewed but this is often little more than a formality and the manner in which the agreement was reached will have no bearing on this decision.

Finally, it’s also assumed that parties must have exhausted the mediation process before asking that the courts to rule on the division of assets. This, considering that mediation was being promoted in order to save the court from the time-consuming task of making such decisions, is also understandable but, one again, false.

In order to successfully request that the court rule on the division of assets, the parties simply need to have attended what is known as a Mediation Information Assessment Meeting. This, as its name suggests, is not even a mediation session but rather a means of determining whether or not mediation would, in the opinion of a qualified professional, help a couple reach an agreement. Even if said professional does believe that the parties would benefit from the process, though, the parties are not obligated to attend and can proceed directly to court if they wish to do so.

To put it simply: you do not need to have attended mediation before you can get divorced.