W v H

W v H

The Petitioner failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Respondent behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him. The evidence was inconsistent, exaggerated, and undermined by oral testimony. The Respondent's autism and the Petitioner’s professional background were relevant; the court found the Respondent’s evidence more credible. No specific behaviour met the statutory test under s1(2)(b) Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The Amended Petition was dismissed.

Parties
Petitioner: W; Respondent: H
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition (matrimonial Causes Act 1973) / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Amended Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Divorce, Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage, Behaviour Petition, Costs Orders, Vulnerable Witnesses
Family Law Divorce Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Behaviour Petition Costs Orders Vulnerable Witnesses

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W

Petitioner

H

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition (matrimonial Causes Act 1973) / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Respondent has behaved in such a way that the Petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the Respondent under s1(2)(b) Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
  2. 2 Whether the marriage was validly constituted
  3. 3 Whether the Petitioner was subject to financial or coercive control

Ratio Decidendi

The Petitioner failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Respondent behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him. The evidence was inconsistent, exaggerated, and undermined by oral testimony. The Respondent's autism and the Petitioner’s professional background were relevant; the court found the Respondent’s evidence more credible. No specific behaviour met the statutory test under s1(2)(b) Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. The Amended Petition was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Amended Petition dismissed

Orders

  • The Amended Petition is dismissed.
  • No order for costs save for Legal Aid Assessment of the Petitioner’s costs where appropriate.