The are various things which might hold up the timetable
of a divorce in England and not the least of these is that the Respondent
(ie the person who receives the divorce petition) does not fully understand
it and therefore delays dealing with it. Bearing in mind that no-one
likes receiving a divorce petition and that each party is understandably
suspicious that the other is trying to steal a march on him/her it is
quite natural that people want to understand what is happening before
committing themselves.
In practice, most of the words of a divorce petition are self-explanatory
and simply recite the details of the marriage. The part which almost
invariably does cause difficulty (and often concern) is the so-called
"prayer" with which the petition ends. This is normally pre-printed
on the divorce petition and in most cases it reads something like the
following:-

(1) is clear enough and causes no problems. (2) is more significant.
In cases involving unreasonable behaviour or adultery the courts usually
order the Respondent to pay the costs of the divorce unless there is
agreement to the contrary. It is therefore sensible to come to an agreement
with the Petitioner over this. "I will not defend the divorce on
condition you do not seek the costs of the divorce from me", for
example, often secures an agreement about costs which both parties are
happy with (because it speeds things up for the Petitioner and costs
less for the Respondent) but the agreement can be of any kind. If there
is no agreement the court will make the usual order and the request
for that is normally pre-printed on the divorce petition as in this
example. If it were not included here the Petitioner would not be able
to seek costs against the Petitioner and so it is sensible to leave
it in until there is agreement.
(3) is what causes most difficulty because people do not understand
it (and, indeed, there is no obvious way they could unless it is explained
to them). What worries most Respondents when they read this is that
they think that the Petitioner is claiming all these things and that
if they return the divorce petition they will in some way have conceded
these points. That is not the case. These points numbered (i)
to (v) are simply the orders which may be made by a divorce
court but a court cannot make such orders unless it is asked to do so.
Very often when a divorce petition is filed the parties do not know
what the final financial settlement will be (and neither do their lawyers).
Therefore all the possible remedies available from a court are included
on the divorce petition although in practice only one or two of them
may eventually turn out to be relevant. "Secured provision orders",
for instance are quite uncommon.
The reason all the possible remedies are included on the petition is
so that the court does not turn round at a later date and say, "But
you didn't ask for this particular order so we cannot give it to you."
In circumstances such as that it would be necessary to seek leave to
amend the divorce petition. In practice it is just better to ask for
all the orders at the outset so as to avoid this difficulty.
It is also necessary to have these orders mentioned here if only to
have them formally dismissed by the court at a later stage. For instance,
both parties might want a "clean break" in which neither pays
maintenance to the other. This is very common and it is what many couples
want. In such a case the eventual court order may formally "dismiss"
the Petitioner's claim for periodical payments. Once that has been done
the Petitioner cannot re-open the matter in the future and there is
truly a "clean break". If this request for periodical payments
were not included in the divorce petition and the final consent order
did not mention it either then theoretically the Petitioner could seek
maintenance from the Respondent at any time in the future. It is therefore
in the Respondent's interests to ensure these words are included as
well as in the Petitioner's.
This is all rather technical and it is a pity that these things are
not straightforward but the bottom line is that there is good reason
why these words are included on the petition. They do not necessarily
mean that the Petitioner is going to seek them all and the Respondent
is not prejudiced in any way by agreeing not to defend a divorce petition
containing these words. The Respondent is just agreeing to the divorce
but not anything else. His/her rights in respect of the financial settlement
remain quite unaffected. It is important to understand this because
this is the very difficulty which usually causes people to bring a divorce
petition to a solicitor. The matter needs to be carefully explained.
(And there is a similar need for explanation of the so-called "Acknowledgment
of Service" for slightly different reasons).
Please contact David
Terry at David_Terry@dterry.demon.co.uk if you need specific advice.
Many of the "technicalities" which are familiar to lawyers
on the various papers relating to divorce are confusing to people who
read them for the first time and the explanation is by no means always
obvious. Explaining their significance often requires legal help. Once
they are properly explained they are not quite so terrifying.