DOCSLIB.ORG

List of Cases

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
List of Cases List of Cases American Law Reports (1953) Annotation: Condonation of cruel treatment as defense to action for divorce. 32 ALR 2d, 107–76. Atkins v. Atkins (1942) 2 All ER 637 (Ch.D). Attorney-General v. Otahuhu Family Court (1995) NZLR 603. B. (L.) v. B. (R.) (1965) 3 All ER 263. Baxter v. Baxter (1948) Times LR 8–11. Bellinger (FC) (Appellant) v. Bellinger (2003) UKHL 21, on appeal from EWCA Civ 1140. Boyd v. Boyd (1955) P. 126. Buckland v. Buckland (orse Camilleri) (1965) P. 296. C and D: see Re the Marriage of C and D (falsely called C) (1979) 35 FLR 340. Clark v. Clark (1958) C.A. The Times. June 25, 1958; C.L. 335. Clarke v. Clarke (1943) 2 All E.R. 540. Cooper v. Cooper (1955) P. 99, p. 115. Corbett v. Corbett (1970) 2 All ER 33. Evans v. Evans (1965) 2 All ER 789. G. v. G. (1952) Supreme Court of Victoria. Victoria Law Reports, pp. 402–10. Gray v. Department of Social Security (1992) Social Security Reporter, 70, 1009. Heffernan v. Heffernan (1953) V.L.R 321. Henderson v. Henderson (1944) A.C. 49, 32–33; 60 T.L.R. Hucker v. Department of Social Security (1992) Social Security Reporter 66, 935. Huffine v. Huffine (1947) CP Ohio Ops 56, 48 Ohio L Abs 430, 74 NE2d 764. 208 List of Cases Jodla v. Jodla (1960) 1 W.L.R. 236. (Weekly Law Reports, pp. 236–39.) Kantaras (1998). See Re Marriage and Michael J. Kantaras. Kevin (2001). See Re Kevin. King v. King (1953) AC 124; (1952) 2 TLR 429; (1952) 2 All ER 584 HL. L. v. L. (1949) 1 All ER 141. Lang v. Lang (1955) AC 402 (HL). Le Brocq v. Le Brocq (1964) 3 All ER 464 (CA). Lee v. Lee (1928) 3 S.W. 2d 672. Locke v. Locke (1956), 95 C.L.R. 165. High Court of Australia. Loving v. Virginia (1967) 388 US 1. M v M (A) (1984) 42 RFL 2d 55. MacLennan v. MacLennan (1958) S.C. 105. Court of Session (Scotland). McKim (1972). See Re Marriage of McKim. McKinnon v. McKinnon (1942) S.A.S.R. 107. Supreme Court of South Australia. Mehta v. Mehta (1945) 2 All ER 690. Otahuhu (1995). See Attorney-General v. Otahuhu (1995). P. v. P. (1964) 3 All ER 919. P. (D.) v. P. (J.) (1965) 2 All ER 456. Parojcic v. Parojcic (1959) 1 All ER 1. R. v. Harris (1971) 55 CAR 290. Re Kevin (validity of marriage of transsexual) (2001) Fam CA 1074. Re Marriage and Michael J. Kantaras v. Linda Kantaras (Case number: 98- 5375 CA 511998 DR 005375xxxxWS). Re Marriage of McKim (1972) 6 Cal. 3d 673. Re the Marriage of C and D (falsely called C) (1979) 35 FLR 340. Rumbelow v. Rumbelow and Hadden (1965) 2 All E.R. 767 (C.A.). S. v. S. (orse C.) (1956) P.1. S.Y. v. S.Y. (orse. W.) (1963) P. 37 (C.A.). Sapsford v. Sapsford and Furtado (1954) P. 394–402. Silver v. Silver (1955) 2 All ER 614. S.T. (formerly J. v J.) (1998) 1 All ER 431. Szechter (orse Karsov) v. Szechter (1971) P. 286. Thompson v. Thompson (1938) P. 162. Todd (No. 2) (1976) F.L.C. 90-008. Tozer v. Department of Social Security (1982) Social Security Appeals Tribunal. Social Security Reporter 10, 99. W. v. W. (1967) 3 All ER 178. White v. White (1948) 2 All E.R. 151. Wieland v. Department of Social Security (1993) Social Security Reporter, 76, 1108. Willan v. Willan (1958) Court of Appeal, W. (D) No. 369. Williams v. Williams (1964) AC 698 (HL). Winnan v. Winnan (1949) P. 174; 65 T.L.R.22; (1948) 2 All E.R. 862. Wright v. Wright (1950) 153 Neb 18, 43 NW2d 424. References Alibhai-Brown, Yasmin, and Anne Montague. 1992. The colour of love: mixed race relationships. London: Virago. Allen, Anita L. 2000. Interracial marriage: Folk ethics in contemporary phi- losophy. In Women of color and philosophy: A critical reader, ed. Naomi Zack, 182–206. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Alsop, Rachel, Annette Fitzsimons, and Kathleen Lennon. 2002. Theorizing gender. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Amadiume, Ifi. 1987. Male daughters, female husbands: Gender and sex in an African society. London: Zed. American Law Reports. 1953. See List of Cases. Andreasen, Kirstin. 2004. Did Loving v. Virginia need its slippery slope? Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues 14 (1): 89–95. Aries, Philippe, and Georges Duby. 1987–1991. A History of private life. 5 vols. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press. Arlington County Public Affairs Division. 2006. News release, January 31, 2006. http://www.arlingtonva.us/NewsReleases/Scripts/ViewDetail .asp?Index=1958. Astell, Mary. 1706. Reflections upon marriage. In The first english feminist: Reflections upon marriage and other writings by Mary Astell, ed. Bridget Hill, 67–132. Aldershot, EN: Gower/Maurice Temple Smith, 1986. Attwood, Bain, and John Arnold, eds. 1992. Introduction. Power, knowl- edge and Aborigines. Special issue of Journal of Australian Studies 35: i–xvi. Atwood, Margaret. 1978. The edible woman. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart-Bantam. 210 References Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words. London: Oxford Univ. Press. Australia, HR. See Australia, House of Representatives. Australia. HREOC. See Australia, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Australia, House of Representatives. 1959. Matrimonial Causes Bill, second reading debate. (Hansard.) Australia, House of Representatives. 1975. Family Law Bill, second reading debate. (Hansard.) Australia. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. 1997. Bringing them home: the report of the national enquiry into the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families. Sydney: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Australia. Law Reform Commission. 1986. The recognition of Aboriginal customary laws. Report No 31 Volume 1. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. Australian Archives. 1959. Refusal of permission for marriage of M. Daly and G. Namagu, Northern Territory. File no: A452: 1959/3783. Mitchell, ACT: Australian Archives. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2007. Marriages, Australia, 2005. 3306.0.55.001. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1967–1974. Annual publications on mar- riage and divorce. http://www.abs.gov.au/. Bailey, Rebecca J. 1979. Family law—Decree of nullity of marriage of true hermaphrodite who has undergone sex-change surgery. Australian Law Journal 53 (9): 659–60. Bailey-Harris, Rebecca. 1996. Law and the unmarried couple—oppression or liberation? Child and Family Law Quarterly 8 (2): 137–47. Baird, Robert M., and Stuart E. Rosenbaum, eds. 1997. Same-sex marriage: The moral and legal debate. Amherst, NY: Prometheus. Baldini, Gwen. 1995. A whole world of difference. In City women, country women: Crossing the boundaries, ed. Jocelynne A. Scutt, 117–31. Melbourne: Artemis. Banner, Lois W. 2000. Review essay (Chancer, LeMoncheck, Ussher). Signs 26 (1): 258–61. Barber, E. H. E. 1969. Divorce—the changing law. In Divorce, society and the law, ed. H. A. Finlay, 69–86. Melbourne: Butterworths. Barrett, Michele, and Mary McIntosh. 1982. The anti-social family. London: Verso. Barwick, Garfield. 1961. Some aspects of the new Matrimonial Causes Act. Sydney Law Review 3 (3): 409–38. References 211 Basch, Norma. 1999. Framing American divorce: From the revolutionary generation to the Victorians. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. Baudrillard, Jean. 1988 Simulacra and simulations. In Jean Baudrillard: Selected writings, ed. Mark Poster, 166–84. Cambridge, UK: Polity. BBC News Online. 1999. Jagger marriage annulled. http://news.bbc.co .uk/2/low/uk_news/419374.stm. Bell, Diane. 1980. Desert politics: Choices in the marriage market. Women and colonization: Anthropological perspectives, eds. M. Etienne and E. Leacock, 239–69. New York: Praeger. ———. 1981. Women’s business is hard work: Central Australian Aboriginal women’s love rituals. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 7 (2): 314–37. ———. 1988. Choose your mission wisely. In Aboriginal Australians and Christian missions: Ethnographic and historical studies, eds. Tony Swain and Deborah Bird Rose, 338–52. Bedford Park: Australian Association for the Study of Religions. Bell, Vikki. 1993. Interrogating incest: Feminism, Foucault, and the law. London: Routledge. Bergen, Raquel Kennedy. 2004. Studying wife rape: Reflection on the past, present and future. Violence Against Women 10 (12): 1407–16. Bernard, Jessie. 1972. The future of marriage. London: Souvenir. Berndt, Ronald. 1961. Tribal marriage in a changing social order. University of Western Australia Law Review 5 (3): 326–46. Berns, S. 2000. Folktales of legality: Family law in the procedural republic; The narrative structure of family law. Law and Critique 11 (1): 1–24. Biondi, Jane. 1999. Who pays for guilt? Recent fault-based divorce reform proposals, cultural stereotypes and economic consequences. Boston College Law Review 40 (2): 611–32. Bird, Carmel, ed. 1998. The stolen children: Their stories. Sydney: Random House. Bissett-Johnson, Alastair, and David C. Day. 1986. The new divorce law: A commentary on the Divorce Act, 1985. Toronto: Carswell. Bittman, Michael, and Jocelyn Pixley. 1997. The double life of the family. St. Leonards, NSW: Allen and Unwin. Blackwood, Evelyn, ed. 1986. The many faces of homosexuality: Anthropological approaches to homosexual behavior. New York: Harrington Park. Blackstone, William. 1773. Commentaries on the laws of England: A reprint of the first edition with supplement. Book 3. London: Dawsons of Pall Mall, 1966. Bockus, Frank. 1993. Couple therapy. Northvale: Jason Aronson. 212 References Boden, Sharon. 2003. Consumerism, romance and the wedding experience. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. The Bodyguard. 1992. Motion picture. Directed by Mick Jackson. Written by Lawrence Kasdan. Starring Kevin Costner, Whitney Houston and Gary Kemp. Warner Brothers. Boswell, John. 1980. Christianity, social tolerance, and homosexuality: Gay people in western Europe from the beginning of the Christian era to the fourteenth century.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Separation and Divorce Information
    Separation and Divorce Information Separation and Divorce Definitions The Legal Process of Separation and Divorce Divorce Mediation Child Support The Emotional Process of Divorce Selecting and Working with Professionals Children and Divorce Taking Care of Yourself During Separation and Divorce The Fairfax County Commission for Women 12000 Government Center Parkway Suite 339 Fairfax, VA 22035 703-324-5730; 711 TTY © 1991; Revised: June 1997, July 2004, August 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................... 1 Separation and Divorce Definitions .................................................... 3 The Legal Process of Separation and Divorce................................... 7 Divorce Mediation............................................................................... 9 Child Support.................................................................................... 11 The Emotional Process of Divorce ................................................... 14 Selecting and Working With Professionals....................................... 16 Children and Divorce........................................................................ 19 Taking Care of Yourself During Separation and Divorce.................. 21 Attorney and Legal Service Referrals............................................... 24 Other Resources .............................................................................. 25 Introduction The Fairfax County Commission for Women developed this information
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    CONTENTS Acknowledgements v Contributors ix Introduction 1 MAVIS MACLEAN Part I Framing Family Law 1 Personal Obligations JOHN EEKELAAR 9 2 Basic Values and Family Law in Recent Judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany WOLFGANG VOEGELI 27 3 Family Values, Friendship Values: Opposition or Continuity? MALGORZATA FUSZARA and JACEK KURCZEWSKI 45 4 The Changing Context for the Obligation to Care and to Earn JANE LEWIS 59 Part II Regulating New Forms of Relationship Between Adults and Children 5 Changing Ways, New Technologies and the Devaluation of the Genetic Connection to Children JULIE SHAPIRO 81 6 Can Co-Parenting be Enforced? Family Law Reform and Family Life in France LAURA CARDIA VONÈCHE and BENOIT BASTARD 95 7 Supporting Conflicted Post-Divorce Parenting KATRIN MUELLER-JOHNSON 107 8 Litigation in the Shadow of Mediation: Supporting Children in Sweden JOHANNA SCHIRATZKI 123 9 Changing Commitments: A Study of Close Kin after Divorce in England CAROL SMART 137 Part III Regulating New Forms of Relationships Between Adults 10 Targeting the Exclusionary Impact of Family Law LISA GLENNON 157 11 Registered Partnerships for Same-Sex Couples in Switzerland: Constructing a New Model of Family Relationships MICHELLE COTTIER 181 viii Contents 12 Same-Sex Relationships in Italy VALERIA MAZZOTTA 201 13 Cohabitation: The Ideological Debate in Spain TERESA PICONTÓ NOVALES 221 Part IV. A Regulating the Relationships Between Adult Children and Elderly Parents 14 Maintenance of the Aged by their Adult Children: an Adequate Legal Institution? JEAN VAN HOUTTE and JEF BREDA 243 15 Obligations of Grown-Up Children to their Elderly Parents: Bulgarian Legislation and Practice VELINA TODOROVA 257 Part IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Report by the Committee on Matrimonial Law the Association of the Bar of the City of New York
    Report by the Committee on Matrimonial Law The Association of the Bar of the City of New York The Case for Amending the New York State Domestic Relations Law to Permit No Fault Divorces Harold A. Mayerson, Chair Eleanor B. Alter, Chair, Legislation Sub-Committee1 November 2004 1 The principal author of this report is Lawrence N. Rothbart. 1 Historically, New York has led the country in legal reform to ensure that its laws protect the welfare of its citizens. However, New York alone is stuck in the past when it comes to one of the most important components of our social fabric -- marriage. Every other state in the United States permits marriages to end without one spouse casting blame upon the other and rehashing the often harsh, painful and embarrassing reasons for the divorce. The fault requirements of the New York State statutes are more than just a reminder of outdated notions of marriage. They have significant financial and emotional costs. A trial on the issue of grounds often costs the litigants thousands of dollars in legal fees, as well as costing the legal system significant court time hearing the details of a marriage which is obviously dead, but may not be entitled to come to an end under the current law. Most troubling, the inability to get divorced may increase incidents of domestic violence and jeopardize the safety and well-being of the spouses. Since 1967 some portion of the Family Law Statutes of the State of New York (the Domestic Relations Law or the Family Court Act) has undergone major modifications approximately every ten years.
    [Show full text]
  • LGBT History Month 2016
    Inner Temple Library LGBT History Month 2016 ‘The overall aim of LGBT History Month is to promote equality and diversity for the benefit of the public. This is done by: increasing the visibility of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (“LGBT”) people, their history, lives and their experiences in the curriculum and culture of educational and other institutions, and the wider community; raising awareness and advancing education on matters affecting the LGBT community; working to make educational and other institutions safe spaces for all LGBT communities; and promoting the welfare of LGBT people, by ensuring that the education system recognises and enables LGBT people to achieve their full potential, so they contribute fully to society and lead fulfilled lives, thus benefiting society as a whole.’ Source: www.lgbthistorymonth.org.uk/about Legal Milestones ‘[A] wallchart has been produced by the Forum for Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Equality in Further and Higher Education and a group of trade unions in association with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans (LGBT) History Month. The aim has been to produce a resource to support those raising awareness of sexual orientation and gender identity equality and diversity. Centred on the United Kingdom, it highlights important legal milestones and identifies visible and significant contributions made by individuals, groups and particularly the labour movement.’ Source: www.lgbthistorymonth.org.uk/wallchart The wallchart is included in this leaflet, and we have created a timeline of important legal milestones. We have highlighted a selection of material held by the Inner Temple Library that could be used to read about these events in more detail.
    [Show full text]
  • Property and Financial Matters Upon the Breakdown of De Facto Relationships
    CFCA PAPER NO. 24 2014 Property and financial matters upon the breakdown of de facto relationships Rachel Carson Reforms introduced in 2009 to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) have meant that most same- sex and opposite-sex de facto couples (in all states and territories except Western Australia) who end their relationships can now have their property and financial matters dealt with in substantially the same way as married people. This paper aims to provide non-legal professionals in the family law sector with a general outline of the relevant reforms, their genesis, and the arguments in favour of and against their introduction. Please note: The content of this paper is intended only to provide general information in summary form. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Legal and other professional advice should be sought by you or your organisation. KEY MESSAGES The 2009 reforms to the Family Law Act (Cth) brought most Australian same-sex and opposite-sex de facto couples within the federal family law system for the resolution of their property and financial matters upon separation. The reforms introduced a definition of de facto relationship and provided guidance to assist in determining whether a de facto relationship may be said to exist. The reforms enable access to property settlement and maintenance for most separated de facto couples in terms substantially the same as those available for married couples. The reforms enable most de facto couples to enter into Binding Financial Agreements, prior to commencing their relationship, during their relationship and upon separation.
    [Show full text]
  • Untying the Knot: an Analysis of the English Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Court Records, 1858-1866 Danaya C
    University of Florida Levin College of Law UF Law Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 1-1-2004 Untying the Knot: An Analysis of the English Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Court Records, 1858-1866 Danaya C. Wright University of Florida Levin College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub Part of the Common Law Commons, Family Law Commons, and the Women Commons Recommended Citation Danaya C. Wright, Untying the Knot: An Analysis of the English Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Court Records, 1858-1866, 38 U. Rich. L. Rev. 903 (2004), available at http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub/205 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at UF Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UF Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNTYING THE KNOT: AN ANALYSIS OF THE ENGLISH DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES COURT RECORDS, 1858-1866 Danaya C. Wright * I. INTRODUCTION Historians of Anglo-American family law consider 1857 as a turning point in the development of modern family law and the first big step in the breakdown of coverture' and the recognition of women's legal rights.2 In 1857, The United Kingdom Parlia- * Associate Professor of Law, University of Florida, Levin College of Law. This arti- cle is a continuation of my research into nineteenth-century English family law reform. My research at the Public Record Office was made possible by generous grants from the University of Florida, Levin College of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Parents Know Best?
    international journal of children’s rights 28 (2020) 613-631 brill.com/chil Do Parents Know Best? John Eekelaar Emeritus Fellow, Pembroke College, Oxford, UK [email protected] Abstract While Article 5 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child requires states to respect parents’ responsibilities to provide ‘appropriate’ direction and guidance to their children, Article 18 also proclaims that ‘the best interests of the child will be [the parents’] basic concern’. But how can this be done if, as is widely accepted, the “best interests” standard is too indeterminate safely to allow courts to substitute their assess- ment of children’s interests for those of a child’s parents? This reason for privatising such decisions has been reinforced by concerns over the extent of public expenditure on court involvement in and legal aid for such issues, with the possible result of with- drawal of the law from this process. This article argues that there are inherent risks in leaving the arrangements for children of separating parents entirely in the hands of the parents, and considers various ways in which such risks might be reduced. Keywords uncrc Articles 6 and 18 – child arrangements – divorce and separation – best interests of the child – privatisation – de-legalisation 1 Introduction While there is legitimate discussion about what direction and guidance which parents and some others are responsible to provide their children is ‘appro- priate’ and ‘consistent with [their] evolving capacities’ in accordance with Article 5 of the uncrc, Article 18 seems to establish an overall obligation that states shall ‘use their best efforts’ to ensure that, in doing that, ‘the best interests of the child will be [the parents’] basic concern’.
    [Show full text]
  • SEXUAL ORIENTATION and GENDER IDENTITY October 2, 2019 10336 ICLE: State Bar Series
    SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY October 2, 2019 10336 ICLE: State Bar Series Wednesday, October 2, 2019 SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY 6 CLE Hours Including | 1 Professionalism Hour Copyright © 2019 by the Institute of Continuing Legal Education of the State Bar of Georgia. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of ICLE. The Institute of Continuing Legal Education’s publications are intended to provide current and accurate information on designated subject matter. They are off ered as an aid to practicing attorneys to help them maintain professional competence with the understanding that the publisher is not rendering legal, accounting, or other professional advice. Attorneys should not rely solely on ICLE publications. Attorneys should research original and current sources of authority and take any other measures that are necessary and appropriate to ensure that they are in compliance with the pertinent rules of professional conduct for their jurisdiction. ICLE gratefully acknowledges the eff orts of the faculty in the preparation of this publication and the presentation of information on their designated subjects at the seminar. The opinions expressed by the faculty in their papers and presentations are their own and do not necessarily refl ect the opinions of the Institute of Continuing Legal Education, its offi cers, or employees. The faculty is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional advice and this publication is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney.
    [Show full text]
  • The Equal Rights Review
    The Equal Rights Review Promoting equality as a fundamental human right and a basic principle of social justice In this issue: ■ Special: Detention and discrimination ■ Gender identity jurisprudence in Europe ■ The work of the South African Equality Courts ■ Homophobic discourses in Serbia ■ Testimony from Malaysian mak nyahs The Equal Rights Review Volume Seven (2011) Seven Volume Review Rights The Equal Biannual publication of The Equal Rights Trust Volume Seven (2011) Contents 5 Editorial Detained but Equal Articles 11 Lauri Sivonen Gender Identity Discrimination in European Judicial Discourse 27 Rosaan Krüger Small Steps to Equal Dignity: The Work of the South African Equality Courts 44 Isidora Stakić Homophobia and Hate Speech in Serbian Public Discourse: How Nationalist Myths and Stereotypes Influence Prejudices against the LGBT Minority Special 69 Stefanie Grant Immigration Detention: Some Issues of Inequality 83 Amal de Chickera Draft Guidelines on the Detention of Stateless Persons: An Introductory Note 105 The Equal Rights Trust Guidelines on the Detention of Stateless Persons: Consultation Draft 117 Alice Edwards Measures of First Resort: Alternatives to Immigration Detention in Comparative Perspective Testimony 145 The Mak Nyah of Malaysia: Testimony of Four Transgender Women Interview 157 Equality and Detention: Experts’ Perspectives: ERT talks with Mads Andenas and Wilder Tayler Activities 179 The Equal Rights Trust Advocacy 186 Update on Current ERT Projects 198 ERT Work Itinerary: January – June 2011 4 The Equal Rights
    [Show full text]
  • CRFR Briefing1final
    CENTRE FOR RESEARCH ON FAMILIES AND RELATIONSHIPS RESEARCH BRIEFING NUMBER 6 October 2002 Divorce in Scotland Key Points l Divorce in Scotland has a distinct and long history with divorce available in common law since 1560, and the first statute in 1573. l Adultery and desertion were the only grounds for divorce until 1938 when other fault-based grounds were added. Support grew to move towards a no fault approach in the 1960s and 1970s. l The current law on the grounds for divorce is set out in the Divorce (Scotland) Act 1976, which created a single ground for divorce, namely, the irretrievable breakdown of a marriage. This can be proved by adultery, behaviour, desertion or non-cohabitation for 2 years, or if only one party consents, for 5 years. l In 2000, over three quarters of all divorces were granted on non-cohabitation grounds, compared with half that proportion less than twenty years earlier. l One of the most far-reaching features of family change has been the much greater likelihood of divorce than a generation ago, with divorce today socially commonplace. Divorce and separation, rather than death, is now the most common reason for a child not to live in the same household as both its parents. l Data on divorce is not the only indicator of relationship breakdown, since it will not reflect sepa- rations either in marriages where parties are not yet divorced, or the end of non-marital cohabitations. l Divorce is more likely for those who married young, especially as teenagers, who had cohabited before marriage, either with the person they married or someone else, who are unemployed or on low incomes, whose parents were divorced, or who were previously divorced themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Fifty Years in Family Law: Essays for Stephen Cretney
    FIFTY YEARS IN FAMILY LAW: ESSAYS FOR STEPHEN CRETNEY FIFTY YEARS IN FAMILY LAW ESSAYS FOR STEPHEN CRETNEY Edited by Rebecca Probert Chris Barton Cambridge – Antwerp – Portland Intersentia Publishing Ltd. Trinity House | Cambridge Business Park | Cowley Road Cambridge | CB4 0WZ | United Kingdom Tel.: +44 1223 393 753 | Email: [email protected] Distribution for the UK: Distribution for the USA and Canada: Hart Publishing Ltd. International Specialized Book Services 16C Worcester Place 920 NE 58th Ave. Suite 300 Oxford OX1 2JW Portland, OR 97213 UK USA Tel.: +44 1865 517 530 Tel.: +1 800 944 6190 (toll free) Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Distribution for Austria: Distribution for other countries: Neuer Wissenschaft licher Verlag Intersentia Publishing nv Argentinierstraße 42/6 Groenstraat 31 1040 Wien 2640 Mortsel Austria Belgium Tel.: +43 1 535 61 03 24 Tel.: +32 3 680 15 50 Email: offi [email protected] Email: [email protected] Fift y Years in Family Law. Essays for Stephen Cretney Rebecca Probert and Chris Barton (eds.) © 2012 Intersentia Cambridge – Antwerp – Portland www.intersentia.com | www.intersentia.co.uk Cover pictures: left : Th e Divinity School, Postcard of “Th e Divinity School” Ref. UK/CP2067 © Th e Bodleian Libraries, Th e University of Oxford middle: Th e Convocation House, Postcard of “Th e Convocation House” Ref. C274 © Th e Bodleian Libraries, Th e University of Oxford right: Magdalen College, Oxford ©Oxford Picture Library/Chris Andrews ISBN 978-1-78068-052-1 NUR 822 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Family Property Law: 'Just and Equitable' Outcomes?
    JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 85 SESS: 21 OUTPUT: Wed Aug 1 21:34:08 2018 /journals/journal/ajfl/vol32pt1/part_1 Australian family property law: ‘Just and equitable’ outcomes? Belinda Fehlberg and Lisa Sarmas* In this article we focus on the broad discretion under Australia’s Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to reallocate interests in property of spouses and separating de facto partners. We look at previous empirical research on the discretion’s operation and consider options for change. We identify that there is a lack of up-to-date empirical research data on the discretion’s operation, and that there is potential risk and possibly limited effect associated with legislative reform in this area. Yet the consistent empirical research finding that women, particularly mothers with dependent children, experience significant economic disadvantage post-separation leads us to see some merit in legislative reform that identifies the need to provide for the material and economic security of the parties and their dependent children as key factors to be considered when making property orders. I Introduction Our article examines the broad discretion under Australia’s Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (‘FLA’) to reallocate interests in property of spouses and, since 2009, separating de facto partners1 in the light of previous empirical research on the discretion’s operation. Although acknowledging the lack of up-to-date empirical research data on the discretion’s operation, and the potential risks and possibly limited effect of legislative reform, the consistent empirical research finding that women, particularly mothers with dependent2 children, experience significant economic disadvantage post-separation prompts us to formulate a proposal for legislative change that identifies the need to provide for the material and economic security of the parties and their dependent children as key factors to be considered when making property orders.
    [Show full text]