Read the full judgment text of FCMC 8680/2012 on BabelCite. This Family Court judgment was delivered on 25 October 2013 before Her Honour Judge Sharon D. Melloy.
Divorce – Unreasonable behaviour – Matrimonial Causes Ordinance – Decree nisi – Costs – Separation agreement – Domestic violence – Extramarital affair – 6-month cohabitation rule – The Petitioner sought a decree of divorce based on the Respondent's unreasonable behaviour. The marriage had been in difficulty for a long period with the Petitioner moving out in May 2009 following an argument and discovery of an extramarital affair. The parties entered an agreement that the move out would not constitute legal separation. The Petitioner moved back in May 2011 for financial reasons but the marital relationship did not recommence. The court considered whether the husband behaved in such a way that the wife could not reasonably be expected to live with him under section 11A of the Matrimonial Causes Ordinance, Cap. 179. The court also considered the six-month rule under section 15A regarding cohabitation after the incident. The court found that the domestic violence incident in April 2009 and the husband's lack of concern for the wife's welfare were sufficient to grant a decree, though failure to maintain was not sufficiently proved. A decree nisi was granted. The husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs. The first appointment and children's appointment were adjourned to 11 December 2013. The court noted that the marriage had broken down irretrievably and there was no possibility of reconciliation. The husband was warned of cost consequences. The court emphasized that trials of this nature only serve to make things worse between parties, especially where children are concerned. The court applied the Livingstone-Stallard test to determine unreasonable behaviour. The court accepted the wife's version of the domestic violence incident as the final straw. The court found the husband's lack of communication and concern unreasonable from both subjective and objective perspectives. The court held that the parties did not live together as man and wife after May 2009 despite the agreement. The court found the husband's extramarital affair was symptomatic but not relied upon as adultery was not pleaded. The court found the failure to maintain was not sufficiently proved due to unclear financial position. The court granted the decree nisi to be made absolute in 28 days.
Legal issues: Unreasonable behaviour test · Six-month cohabitation rule · Failure to maintain
Outcome: Decree nisi of divorce granted based on the husband’s unreasonable behaviour
Cites 1 case