Grounds for Divorce

The question is in regards to family law, concerning the issue of divorce where it seeks to answer whether following the presented facts of the case the party seeking divorce can be able to obtain it. The law in addressing the issue of divorce, it looks at some general grounds which must be satisfied by the party seeking for it before it’s granted. The major grounds looked at include; the concept of adultery, the mental state of the parties to the divorce, the issue of desertion, cohabitation and the concept of unreasonable behavior.

Following the facts of the case, the major issue is in regards to whether person X is able to obtain a divorce order by asserting that one of the mention grounds of divorce has contributed to their relationship breaking down irretrievable and therefore should be granted a divorce. In addition, other issues to be looked into include grounds for divorce as outlined by the law such as desertion and unreasonable behavior, mantle health whether X contributed to Ys insane delusions, if a cross petition can be filed and if the presented grounds are sufficient for X to be granted a divorce order.

Following the provisions of the Act, the major ground for divorce to be granted is being able to prove that a marriage has indeed irretrievable broken down. Where   the parties must show that they have been living separately for not less than twelve months from the day one of them communicated the intention to commence divorce proceedings, also the parties should be able to show no reasonable likelihood for them to reconcile, (Chng 2018). Further, the court in determining such behavior looks into the evidence of the following:

Adultery within the context of divorce refers to the voluntary act of sexual relation between either married people or married and unmarried persons. It’s one of the most commonly used grounds for divorce as outlined in section 95(3a). In citing adultery a wife is required to prove an act of adultery, or the act having taken place in the conjugal dwelling or it having taken place together with other circumstances or conduct such as bigamy and cruelty.  Further, in citing adultery one has to prove two things, that is: that indeed the respondent/the partner were involved in the act and that the partner filing the divorce finds it intolerable to continue living with the respondent as a result of the act. In addition, if the person filling the petition continues living with the respondent for a period of six months and more being knowledgeable of the partners act he/she cannot rely on adultery as a ground for divorce, (Chung, 2018).

Adultery

In regards to the facts of the case, adultery cannot be used as a ground for divorce in this circumstance since neither of the parties has displayed any act of adultery as provided for by the  Act. Further, a case in point to illustrate is that of (Easteal,  Young & Carline 2018)On the other hand, section 95(3b) addresses the issue of behavior by requiring that the other party should have displayed unreasonable behavior such that it’s not expected of him/her to live with the respondent.

Further, regarding the issue of mental health as a ground for divorce, one does not need to prove it to the court in order for divorce to be granted since for a divorce application to proceed, one only needs to show that the relationship as it is has broken down irretrievably. Mental health is usually relevant when determining the issue of division of property more so when the parties salary income is affected because of the illness, (Keogh, Smyth & Masardo 2018)

In regards to desertion for a period of 3 years as outlined in section 95 (3d) as a cause of mental health or consent and for four years as indicated in section 95(3e) either party can apply for divorce, since the provided years in regards to desertion is two years. Further, the court can look into the issue of finance as indicated in section 95(4) if it considers that granting the divorce will wrong and therefore refuse the application. In addition, considering the issue of partners living apart, the petitioner should be able to demonstrate that as partners they have been living apart for a continuous period of not less than five years as from the time when the petition is presented.

Following the given laws X cannot be granted a divorce since from the facts of the case one cannot find any ground to rely on so as to be granted divorce i.e. no case of adultery has been shown, there has been no physical separation for the required time of 3 or4 years since X has been visiting Y in hospital and upon Y being discharged X did not show any reluctance in regards to taking care of Y.  In addition, previously when Y complained about the snake X found a spare room for it in order to make her comfortable, (Lim, 2018).

In regards to Ys delusions X did contribute to it since she had informed him about her fear of reptiles which led her to leaving their matrimonial home. Further, she developed the delusions a few months after leaving their home which was highly contributed by the fact that she was leaving in a home that housed a snake.

Unreasonable Behavior

As illustrated therefore, X does not have sufficient reasons to divorce Y since she is mentally ill and requires medical attention and care. Also she has not in any way displayed unreasonable behavior for her to be divorced. Also the ground in regards to desertion cannot be relied on since despite them not living in the same house for six and a half years Y by visiting X in hospital for the six month period she was there, demonstrated an act of them being in contact which is against the law in regards to desertion and therefore it can’t be relied upon as a ground for divorce.

In regards to cross-petition, the defendant in this scenario that is why Y stands a chance to file such a petition since it’s the unreasonable behavior of X that has contributed to her suffering from mental health.

Conclusion

In conclusion therefore, X does not have sufficient ground for him to be granted a divorce, since all the available grounds do not in any way prove that their relationship has irretrievable broken down due to the available five facts for him to be afforded a divorce. 

References

Chng, G. S. (2018). Family profiles of maltreated children in Singapore: a latent class analysis. Child abuse & neglect, 79, 465-475.

Chung, S. P. Y. (2018). Creating ‘Family’Networks across Time and Space: The Alsagoffs in Singapore, 1824–2009. Modern Asian Studies, 52(2), 458-491.

Easteal, P., Young, L., & Carline, A. (2018). Domestic Violence, Property and Family Law in Australia. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 32(2), 204-229.

Keogh, E., Smyth, B., & Masardo, A. (2018). Law reform for shared-time parenting after separation: reflections from Australia. Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 30, 518-544.

Lim, C. Y. (2018). Psychometric Evaluation of the Young Children’s Participation and Environment Measure (YC-PEM) for use in Singapore. Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics, 38(3), 316-328.

The question looks into the family law issue where it seeks to answer questions in relation to divorce. The general laws as outlined provide for various grounds for divorce such as adultery.  Although such grounds are looked into, the party seeking for divorce must be able to prove that the marriage has irretrievable broken down by showing that they have separately lived from each other for a period of not less than twelve months, (Schenk, 2018).

The major questions to be addressed are as follows: if following the facts of the case H can go ahead with the divorce proceedings? Establishing the fact under which this case falls in regards to addressing the issue of divorce and demonstrating the unreasonable behavior displayed by W and how it can be changed.

Desertion

In regards to the laws that are to be applied when determining whether to grant divorce or not, one of the major ground looked into is; irretrievable breakdown as outlined in section 95(1) of the Act.  In looking into it, one of the following facts has to be evidenced:

The issue of adultery as outlined in section 95(3a) where if either of the parties engages in another relationship while still in a legal relationship, the other party can commence divorce proceedings on the ground of adultery. Following the facts of the case, there is no mention or any evidence of adultery therefore excluding it as a ground in this situation.

The issue of behavior as considered in section 95(3b) where the petitioner is required to demonstrate that his/her partner has behaved in an unreasonable manner such that the other partner finds it intolerable to put up with him or her and that such behavior has led to the relationship irretrievably breaking down, (Seng, 2018).

The fact of desertion as outlined in section 95(3c) whereby it’s required for partners to completely withdraw from each other for a period of not less than twelve months. Also, if the two are living separately there should be two different households. In addition to that if the partners have physically lived apart for four years as outlined in section 95(3e). Such was demonstrated in the case of , Wasoff & Dobash, 2018).

Further, section 95(4) provides for need to look into the issue of finance and other hardships if after consideration it finds that dissolving the marriage in the given circumstance will not be right.

Following the circumstances of the case and the given relevant laws, H can go ahead with the divorce proceeding since W by frequently making jokes about H’s involvement in black magic, refusing to prepare meals and doing the other chores she previously did for him before joining the classes and also by locking out her partner after changing the locks demonstrated the act of unreasonable behavior  which as per the section 95(3b) allows him to rely on it as a ground for divorce and therefore giving him a go ahead for divorce as referring to the behavior its intolerable and therefore reasonable not to expect him to continue living with it, (Pinye 2018).

On the other hand, regarding the issue of the fact under which the case falls in order for a divorce to be granted is section 95(3b) which addresses the issue of  unreasonable behavior that has  resulted to  H finding it intolerable to put up with W and therefore its highly contributing to their marriage breaking irretrievable. In addition, looking at the facts, there is no likelihood that the two partners at some point are going get back also due to Ws unapologetic behavior it’s intolerable for H to continue putting up with her, (Chung, 2018).

Further, looking at Ws behavior she needs to refrain from changing the locks and issue H with the new keys. She also has to stop terming the performance of some duties as amounting her to a slave and refrain from joking about Hs involvement in black magic since it’s the unreasonable behavior that it’s highly contributing to their relationship irretrievable breaking down and therefore affording H a divorce.

Conclusion

In conclusion therefore, the legislation makes it possible for H to go ahead with the divorce proceedings in which the court is likely to grant him a divorce since he is able to demonstrate that Ws unreasonable behavior are making it intolerable for him to continue living with her.

References

Chung, S. P. Y. (2018). Creating ‘Family’Networks across Time and Space: The Alsagoffs in Singapore, 1824–2009. Modern Asian Studies, 52(2), 458-491.

Pinye, H. G. (2018). Family profiles of maltreated children in Singapore: a latent class analysis. The Geographical Journal, 14(3), 81-118.

Schenk, C. G. (2018). Islamic leaders and the legal geography of family law in Aceh, Indonesia. The Geographical Journal, 184(1), 8-18.

Seng, G. Q. (2018). The Gender Politics of Confucian Family Law: Contracts, Credit, and Creole Chinese Bilateral Kinship in Dutch Colonial Java (1850s–1900). Comparative Studies in Society and History, 60(2), 390-414.

Wasoff, F., & Dobash, R. E. (2018). The Simulated Client (1996): A Method for Studying Professionals Working with Clients. Routledge.