Mrs Owens & the Supreme Court: was all the relevant evidence heard before the court below? David Burrows investigates
- Was Tini Owens given a proper trial of all of the allegations which she could have put before the first instance judge?
Mrs Tini Owens (TO) is to remain nominally married to Mr Hugh Owens (HO) ( Owens v Owens [2018] UKSC 41), at least till one of them can obtain a decree nisi based on their having lived apart for five years (Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) s 1(2)(e)) in early 2020. The Supreme Court has refused her appeal, for much the same reason as did the Court of Appeal ( Owens v Owens [2017] EWCA Civ 182, [2017] 4 WLR 74). However, in the course of the judgments of Lord Wilson and Lady Hale, disturbing elements of the way the case had been put before the court below emerged. These suggest that TO may not have been given a proper trial of all of the allegations
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
