Divorce makes you happier apparently….

Researchers at Kingston University have recently published the results of a study in the journal Economica which shows that women are significantly happier for up to 5 years after their divorce.

Men apparently feel slightly happier after their divorce, but the increase in happiness is not as marked as for women.

The study involved 10,000 participants over 20 years who were asked to rate their happiness before and after major events in their lives. Divorce it would seem makes you happier.  The study revealed that unemployment is the one major life event which has a long term negative impact on the well being of both men and women, surprisingly more so than being widowed.

Commenting on why divorce may make women happier than men, Professor Yannis Georgellis of Kingston Business School said “One explanation could be that women who enter into an unhappy marriage feel much more liberated after divorce than their male counterparts.”

The ONS latest statistics on divorce reveals that the most common ground for women to seek a divorce is unreasonable behaviour; 54%  of divorces granted to women are on this ground as against 36% of divorces granted to men on the same ground. Perhaps these statistics explain a little why women’s perception of divorce is different to men’s.

Either way the findings of this study show that not only is there life after divorce, but it should be a happier life too.  

 

Sally Leaman

Head of Family Law Gorvins

The Quickest and the Biggest UK Divorces ever?

It seems as though you can barely open a newspaper or magazine nowadays without reading details of another celebrity couple to divorce. Nigella Lawson’s divorce was reported recently as being granted only weeks after pictures of Charles Saatchi apparently assaulting her outside a London restaurant made headline news. Often when the press reports a divorce as having been granted it is referring to the decree nisi in the divorce rather than the decree absolute which finalises the dissolution of the marriage. Either way the Lawson / Saatchi divorce has proceeded very quickly, and this is no doubt attributable to the fact that neither party is making a financial claim against the other.

The Law Society has recently issued a warning that celebrity divorces are unrealistic for the rest of us, and as  most divorces will involve a financial claim being made (even if that is ultimately settled by agreement) parties should not assume their divorce can be finalised with the  same speed as Lawson and Saatchi.

In the same statement the President of the Law Society warns that a cut price online managed divorce could end up costing more in time, money and stress in the long run. He advises it is crucial to take advice from a specialist family law solicitor particularly where there are children and / or financial assets  where an online process is not going to give you important tactical advice as to the options open to you.

Also making headlines this week is a £54 million divorce which has just been ordered in the High Court and which is being described as the biggest divorce pay out in contested UK proceedings. As yet no further details of the case have been released, although I would hazard a guess given there have been little prior press reports about the case that for once it is not about a celebrity couple’s separation.

Sally Leaman

Head of Family Law Gorvins

‘Til death us do part from our matrimonial assets?

A recent case that appeared in the media in May of 2013 highlights the real need for caution and attention to the fine print when it comes to keeping a claim to matrimonial assets alive.

The case was that of a 71 year old man, Mr McIntosh, whose divorce had been made final by decree absolute in 2009 after a 16 year marriage to his wife who later died in 2011.

At the time of the divorce, a financial settlement order was also made by consent that provided for a “clean break” whereby each spouse was to retain those assets already held in their sole names and not be permitted to make any further financial claim against the other – or the others estate – in the future.  This is not an unusual type of order to see.

The oddity here was that Mr McIntosh claimed he did not realise that he was divorced and did not know what the papers he had signed were, because he struggled with literacy.  Supportive of this stated belief was the fact that Mr McIntosh and his wife had continued to live together until Mrs McIntosh’s later death from cancer some two years after the divorce.

The impact upon Mr McIntosh of being both divorced and having the financial settlement order, was that there was no legal basis for him to claim anything from his former wife’s estate.  His former wife’s estate in this case included the matrimonial home itself which she had purchased in her sole name and which is now worth in the region of £350,000.

The house went to Mrs McIntosh’s estate on her death which means that Mrs McIntosh was either intestate or, if she had made a Will, subsequent to the divorce, that it had not made provision for her former spouse.  As there had been a divorce, Mr McIntosh was not her next of kin for intestacy purposes.

Was there anything Mr McIntosh could do?  The answer is no, albeit he did attempt to do so by making an application to the Court to have the decree absolute of his divorce set aside.  His application was refused and indeed such applications would very rarely be granted.  The exact reasons of Lord Justice Ryder who dealt with the matter have yet to be given. 

What should be taken away and filed from this case?

1.    Do not sign anything that you do not fully understand.  You would fully expect a Solicitor to say it, but it makes absolute sense to take independent legal advice first to ensure a reasonable and fair outcome (which may or may not include a right to claim after the other spouse’s death).

 

2.    If you do want to achieve a full and final financial settlement from a spouse then be aware that it is a two step process that requires both (i) a concluded divorce where a decree absolute has been pronounced and (ii) a financial settlement order that has been approved and sealed by the Court.

The reasons for requiring both of these are:-

·         It is not possible to have a financial settlement order without a divorce as a Court cannot consider or approve a financial agreement reached as a Court Order until such time as the mid-point (decree nisi) of a divorce has been reached and

·         It is only the decree absolute of a divorce that makes any financial order final and binding

It is for the above two reasons, that Mr McIntosh’s representatives attempted to attack the decree absolute itself

3.    If you do want to benefit your former spouse or provide for them upon your death but have made no specific provision for this within a financial settlement order (which is possible) then look to your Will provision and be aware that a divorce has the impact of rendering any pre existing Will that benefits your former spouse as void insofar as any reference to that individual appears upon the face of the Will.

So no, it is not death alone that parts you from your matrimonial assets, it could well be a failure to obtain and act upon sound legal advice! 

Nicola Fraser

Senior Associate
Gorvins Solicitors

Avoid a Holiday Headache

It is that time of year…the school summer break and a chance to take the children abroad on holiday. Caution however needs to be exercised in the run up to a family holiday abroad as many parents are unaware of the legalities involving the removal of a child from the country.

 

Disputes in relation to the family trip abroad tend to peak at this time of the year. It is common for separated or divorced parents not to know that they are required to obtain the permission of the other parent or person with parental responsibility regardless of whether it is for a day trip to the continent or a fortnight’s trip to the States.

 

If a child is taken abroad without written permission from the other parent or person with parental responsibility then technically this is child abduction and it is entirely possible for the other parent to instigate child abduction court proceedings because of what is nothing more than an innocent family holiday.

 

If a parent or person with parental responsibility refuses to provide their permission then a court application for permission to take a child on holiday aboard without the others permission will be necessary. When considering such an application, the court will be expecting to see documents confirming the travel plans, reasons for the trip and contact details for the travelling parent and child.

 

It is important that a parent or person with parental responsibility does not automatically assume that they have the permission of the other parent or that permission is not required. Written permission should always be obtained well in advance of any proposed trips abroad as last minute disputes may cause upset to the child and may increase the acrimony between the parents which may have a detrimental effect on the child in terms of agreeing the future arrangements for contact.

 

It is important to note that the situation is very different if a mother alone has parental responsibility and there is no Residence Order concerning a child. If this is the case, permission from the other parent is not strictly necessary although it is always good practice to consult with the other parent. Where a person seeking to take the child abroad has a Residence Order, they are able to take the child abroad without the written permission of the other for up to one month, again however, good practice would be to consult with the other parent.

 

When dealing with children issues, it is extremely important to seek specialist legal advice at an early stage to ensure that there are no difficulties or last minute changes to the family holiday arrangements.

 

Kerry Russell