Case Study 1: X and Y’s Marriage
1. Both X and Y was happy in their nuptial life. They did not have any problems in the last seven years that they have been married. Y was oblivious to the vital information that X’s only hobby was to keep reptiles as pets. X used to keep a reptile which in this case was not known to the better half of X and hence it could be said that it was naturally a shock when Y came to know about it. It is very clear from the information that X did not want to part ways with the snake and it did not go down well with Y as she thought it was pretty weird as well as not safe to live with snakes in the house and hence she initially tried to talk it out with X her husband. On this note X seemed pretty stubborn and intransigent to communicate with Y regarding this and hence it became a complete chaos. This issue might seem to be trivial but the incidents that followed clearly were not trivial and did have significant impact on their marriage life. Even though Y tried her best to keep the snake out of the house but X was not able to choose between his love for the snake and love for his wife. He agreed to confine it in a spare room but he did not agree to throw it out which definitely created more issues as for a wife it is tough to swallow that she has to share her husband with someone or something else which was definitely happening here. She could not gulp it down and tried to stay with it for sometime but shackles broke and she went out of the matrimonial home after six months.
It is important to mention that in between this both X and Y did not have any communications in fact X didn’t know the exact location of Y until he was informed of her presence in a mental health home. It was reported to X that Y was receiving mental health treatment in the hospital as she was having delusions regarding snakes. It could be said that in-spite of knowing that Y was receiving treatment as she was having delusions regarding snakes X did not mind keeping the snake away for his wife. When Y was discharged she refused to go with X as he still had the snake at the matrimonial home which definitely shows that X is not at all concerned about his wife and is much more caring to the pet snake. Since then both of them have not lived in the same house for over a significant amount of time six and half years to be precise and X has asked for divorce from Y which clearly shows that there is no love between the two but Y doesn’t want to give divorce as she is financially weak and doesn’t want to lose the opportunity to get the matrimonial home after X’s death.
Case Study 2: H and W’s Marriage
It is an interesting case of family law which clearly shows that problems could be trivial but could still have immense impact on the relationship between couples. Before going into the legal detail it is important to mention in this case that there have been significant confusions between the two X and Y. It is important that couples share everything between themselves but in this case X did not tell Y about his secret hobby of keeping reptiles as pets which later formed to be the main problem for X seeking divorce and Y going out of the Matrimonial house.
It is important to note that as per Family Law living separately and being separated is completely different. Living separately doesn’t mean that a couple is divorced and they can live separately but they are not divorced and might be living because of differences in their mindset and understanding whereas being separated means that a couple has been divorced officially which means that court has officially intervened to separate them. Hence it could be said that if the spouses are living apart it doesn’t mean they are separated and hence they will have to take the refuge of law in order to break their relationship after marriage for official mark of separation in their relationship (Abrams et al., 2012). One of the main questions that couples ask themselves before asking for divorce is “is it really necessary?” in this case it could be seen that both the persons X and Y didn’t have any serious issues between them and mere issue has led to the problems in their married life. From a layman’s point of view divorce could be an option when a couple is not been able get along really well and that’s the last resort for both of them.
In this case X clearly feels that way and he doesn’t want to stretch things any further even when they are not staying together. It could be said that X doesn’t want to give anything to his wife and wants divorce but Y doesn’t want to agree on the divorce as she is financially weak. It is natural decision that comes to Y as she is a weak lady in terms of finance and she thinks the property of X is her last resort to lead her life properly after his death. On the other hand X could definitely ask for the divorce as he doesn’t want to stay with his spouse anymore (Chused, 2015). It becomes very complicated if the other half is not ready to give divorce and this is when it is important to seek the help of professional lawyers. As per the Family Law it wouldn’t be a problem for the X to get divorce from Y. In order to get divorce from his wife X will have to prove one fact out of the below five:
- Adultery
- Unreasonable behavior
- Desertion (for at least two years)
- Two years separation and a letter or agreement from the spouse.
- Five years separation (Gregory et al., 2011).
The main ground for divorce is incompatibility or irreconcilable differences which cannot be mended between the two people. In this case it wouldn’t be that tough for X to get a divorce as they have been living separately for over five years which automatically makes them separate couples and hence if Y doesn’t sign or accept the petition for the divorce X could state this fact and could get the divorce easily. In the present case Y is concerned about her divorce and hence if she doesn’t give the divorce she would be able to inherit the property of X after his death as she will retain her rights to get all the property of X. As per the modern Family if a person dies without a will then he or she is called intestate person. For an intestate person after his or her death the immediate family will receive the right to hold on to the property which would automatically pass through to him or her as they become the closest relatives (Martin, 2009). Hence it could be said that Y is looking forward to this as she is the wife of X and if she doesn’t given divorce to X she would inherit the property which would help her lead the rest of her life effectively. But in this case since they have lived without each other for over five years this automatically makes them eligible to get divorce and hence it would easily in favor of X (Ross, 2009 Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 83-120).
Living Separately vs. Being Separated
On this note it could be said that even though X gets Divorce as per the modern family law X will have to provide spousal maintenance to Y given her financial situation which becomes extremely important criteria to get the divorce. Spousal maintenance could be defined as the income payable by one spouse to the other in addition to any child maintenance. The common law states that there’s an automatic entitlement of spousal maintenance for divorce or dissolution of marriage which means that there is a common law duty which is imposed on the spouse to maintain the other half not only during the marriage but also after the separation (Harris-Short & Miles, 2011). This becomes much stronger when one party is much weaker financially and hence it could be said that in this case X will have to pay spousal maintenance to Y and he will naturally get divorce as it could be easily established that they have been living separately for a long period of time. Evidently both of them have not had good relationship and hence the decision of X is quite justified which would help to give them respite both legally as well as socially but Y in this case wouldn’t be able to get the inheritance of the property even though she would definitely be entitled for spousal maintenance given her financial condition it would be proven very easily. Hence to conclude it could be said that X will get divorce but not without spousal maintenance paid to Y (Diduck & Kaganas, 2012).
2. In this case it is very clear that both H and W are not having a good relationship and would like to end their marriage but W is held back because of her family issues as her mother is a staunch Catholic and doesn’t want any of her children to get divorced or else she would write them off. It is important to mention here that both the persons are not happy with each other especially because that somehow W has not been able to accept the fact that in spite of being a successful businessman her husband H is into black magic. She is an independent character and their rift started when their only daughter J left home and started living somewhere else (Gaer, 2009, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 60-66). It is important to understand that may be due to this reason the bitterness in their relationship became conspicuous. In the recent past they have had number of issues as the W started adult education classes where she became more independent and a more active feminist raising her voice against almost every atrocities of men and while doing this she forgot her daily routine and her duty towards her matrimonial home. She refused to cook and clean for her husband which couldn’t be tolerated by H. It was also noticed that she went beyond all the limits one day and made her husband stand out of her home for 2 hours by changing the lock of the main door (Dommaraju & Jones, 2011, 39(6), 725-750).
When is Divorce Necessary?
They regularly had issues and heated arguments and one day H said to W “Shape up or Get out” that definitely affected her feminist ego after which she made her husband wait. It could be said that they have often gotten into problems which exacerbated things further. From the above facts it is quite clear why H wants divorce from W and apparently it seems valid as H has done his part of job of feeding her and providing her shelter and giving her all the basic amenities that a husband should give to her wife but the wife did not reciprocate to this behavior and she consistently focused on being malicious which did the rest of the job to ask for divorce. In this case the couples have stayed together for a long time but living separately in the same house which indicates the lost relationship of them (Douglas et al., 2012). Both of the entities have been living their lives with their own schedule and don’t bother about the other which would definitely act positively for divorce but in this case H has to prove of their differences. It could be said that even though both the persons are not interested in the marriage but the move is made by H it would be little difficult for the Husband to get divorce as per the Women’s Charter 2009 where both husband and wife have been given equal rights of almost everything including the matrimonial home . As per the Women’s Charter it could be said that the matrimonial property will be divided equally which is stated in the Charter very clearly (Ross, 2009 Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 83-120).
It could be said that the Women’s charter provides significant leverage to women and their rights and also condemns domestic violence and atrocities against women. The revised Women’s Charter in the 2009 highlighted the extended opportunities for women and their rights and regulations in marriage and in divorce. Even though there are very few grounds for H to get divorce from W it could be said that on the basis of non-cooperation from the wife the Husband in this case could get divorce. The Ho Kiang Fah v Toh Buan Eileen [2009] SGHC 19 is a similar case where the Women’s Charter was used to provide the verdict against a counterclaim made by the Husband that the divorce should be provided as the wife deserted him before couple of years against a claim for divorce petition filed by the Wife or the respondent which was accepted by the DJ. As per the Women’s Charter Section 95(3) (e) which was held by the High court considering the fact that the marriage broke irretrievably and the judge also stated to provide spousal maintenance to the appellant who later appealed to the High Court but it was denied given the fact that it was proven that the marriage didn’t have anything left. Similarly the Article 95(1) stated that either party could file a writ for divorce on the grounds that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. Section 95 (3) (b) also states that if the defendant has behaved in such a way that the plaintiff cannot reasonably be expected to live with the defendant which has happened in this case and hence it could be said that the Husband could definitely ask for divorce from the wife (Abrams et al., 2012). Another Similar case which shows the impact of Unreasonable behavior is the Wong Sook Kuen v Loh Choon Fah [2015] SGHC 36. This case was solved as per the article 95 (3) (b) Women’s Charter which states that the plaintiff (w) sued the defendant (h). The Court allowed divorce to the wife on the basis of reasonable behavior on the part of the husband. As per the women’s charter it is important for the Plaintiff in the present case (Husband) to prove that the wife (defendant) has showed unreasonable behavior with him by not cooking or cleaning for him and also mistreating her husband by mocking and joking about him and also not allowing him to enter the matrimonial home which is originally his own property (Diduck & Kaganas, 2012).
He could highlight the facts so far which is likely to go in favor of him to get the divorce successfully but again the aspect of equal right will come into play where H might have to give away equal share of the matrimonial assets to W as per the Women’s Charter 2009 (Gaer, 2009, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 60-66). Overall to conclude it could be said that H could get divorce on the basis of non-cooperation, incompatibility and irreconcilable differences between them which would help to get the divorce but not without providing equal assets and financial rights to W (Dommaraju & Jones, 2011, 39(6), 725-750).
References:
Abrams, D. E., Cahn, N., Ross, C. J., & Meyer, D. D. (2012). Contemporary family law.
Chused, R. H. (2015). Private Acts in Public Places: A Social History of Divorce in the Formative Era of American Family Law. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Gregory, J. D. W., Swisher, P. N., & Wolf, S. L. (2011). Understanding family law. LexisNexis.
Martin, E. A. (2009). A dictionary of law. OUP Oxford.
Harris-Short, S., & Miles, J. (2011). Family law: text, cases, and materials. Oxford University Press.
Diduck, A., & Kaganas, F. (2012). Family law, gender and the state: Text, cases and materials. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Douglas, G., Doe, N., Gilliat-Ray, S., Sandberg, R., & Khan, A. (2011). Social cohesion and civil law: Marriage, divorce and religious courts.
Dommaraju, P., & Jones, G. (2011). Divorce trends in Asia. Asian Journal of Social Science, 39(6), 725-750.
Ross, S. D. (2009). Women’s human rights: the international and comparative law casebook. University of Pennsylvania Press (Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 83-120).
Gaer, F. (2009, February). Women, international law and international institutions: The case of the United Nations. In Women’s Studies International Forum (Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 60-66). Pergamon.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
