header-logo header-logo

09 June 2021
Issue: 7936 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

No-fault divorce reforms off the table for 2021

Lawyers have expressed dismay at ministers’ decision to delay divorce reforms for six months while it grapples with issues regarding technology, legal, and court procedures.

Justice minister Chris Philp confirmed by way of a parliamentary question this week that implementation of no-fault divorce reforms under the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 will now take place on 6 April 2022. According to Philp, the Family Procedure Rule Committee is still finalising rule changes, and ministry officials are working on amendments to court forms and the online digital divorce service.

‘Following detailed design work, it is now clear that these amendments, along with the full and rigorous testing of the new system ahead of implementation, will not conclude before the end of the year,’ he said.

Neil Russell, partner at Seddons, described the delay as ‘hugely disappointing.

‘Bearing in mind that the last set of [Office for National Statistics] divorce statistics revealed that unreasonable behaviour remains the most common reason for divorce, cited by 49% of wives and 35% of husbands, the blame game needs to end sooner rather than later’.

Emily Foy, senior associate at Payne Hicks Beach, said: ‘HM Courts and Tribunal Service has been working on the online platform for some time, which is already up and running for the current divorce process.

‘It is frustrating that the modifications to the system have not been expedited for this reform. I am aware of a number of couples who have agreed to wait until the autumn to formalise their separation, allowing them to divorce consensually, whose plans have now been thwarted.’

Roopa Ahluwalia, partner at BDB Pitmans, said the delay was disappointing but not surprising: ‘The court system that manages the logistics of all divorces has been underfunded for a number of years and the impact of the pandemic with remote working and hearings has seen it truly creaking.’

Issue: 7936 / Categories: Legal News , Divorce , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll