Family seminar notes

Do not need to talk about the validity of the marriage. The question will tell you. 

There must be irretrievable breakdown under the 5 facts. 

Howell case- they were granted a divorce as they didnt speak to each other at all. 

It is very fact dependent. 

The other partner may cross appeal with a different ground. You could argue a different ground to the one the person in the question wants- if it is clear they will not get the ground they want. 

May want a judicial separation- they are still married but dont have to live together. 

If there is adultery in a civil partnership, this will come under unreasonable behaviour. 

Expected to spot key issues and themes. It does not matter if you have a different answers to others- this does not mean its wrong. Must use relevant legal principles in context. Can be harsh as long as it is justified.

Look at what is available for division. 

Seminar 3-

If he was only screaming at the children, there can be unreasonable behaviour anyway. The behaviour can be unreasonable even if not directed specifically at the petitioner. 

If using adultery, he needs to admit it or it must be proved. 

There may be a link between harassing behaviour and domestic violence. 

For Protection from Harassment Act 1997 there must be two examples of harassment. These can be the threat of violence and then the carrying out of the violence. 

Treat the mahr as a pre- nup so apply those cases. Must have procedural and substantive

fairness. 

In an Islamic marriage, she may lose her religious settlement but ask for it back in civil financial proceedings. 

They are two paralell processes and may speak to each other and overlap.