The proposal aims to define a consistent set of rules that will enable couples to choose which country’s law would apply to them in case of divorce. However, the choice would be limited to countries the couple is connected to in order to prevent the emergence of “divorce paradises”, as the Commission describes them, where people could choose a jurisdiction based on the advantages offered. Couples could make the choice in a pre-marital agreement, or by a contract drawn up when applying for the divorce. At present, divorce is often a case of ‘who gets there first’. Sometimes, divorcing couples are forced to rush to their country of origin to try and get the law on their side. Head of Family Law at London solicitors, Dawsons, Suzanne Kingston, is all for harmonization. She says that you could save a small fortune if you could choose the country where you want to divorce. For instance, if you are divorcing in France, you could escape paying maintenance. Having to issue divorce papers in a hostile jurisdiction could cost you a staggering amount of money. Patrick Kluivert, the Dutch Newcastle United striker is said to be offering his wife £6 million in a one-off settlement. Lady Meyer, now wife of UK ambassador, Sir Christopher Meyer, also supports harmonization of EU divorce law. She says that if you are sitting in London, and your divorce lawyers are in Germany, language differences could come in the way. She had faced this problem when her former husband had taken their children to his native Germany. 52% of the EU25 population think that couples should be free to choose which country’s divorce law they should abide by, and in which country they will carry out divorce proceedings. The majority (55%) in the New Member States and 51% in the EU15 support this view. To complicate things further, some EU states are applying only their own domestic law to divorce proceedings, whereas other states apply the law they find most suitable to a particular couple. In some circumstances, Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, France, Estonia, Greece, Portugal, Italy, and Poland apply the laws of other states, while in Scotland and Sweden, there is the possibility of the application of foreign law. As far as the availability of divorce is concerned, in Scotland and Spain, couples don’t have to put in a year of marriage before divorce. In Northern Ireland, couples can only divorce after four years of marriage. In sharp contrast, the Republic of Ireland does not allow a clean break to divorcing couples. A divorce can only take place after four years of separation. What’s more, couples should show that reconciliation is impossible and satisfactory arrangements have been made for the children and spouse. In Sweden, couples don’t need grounds for divorce, but if a spouse is opposed to the divorce or there is a child aged under 16, a six-month consideration period applies. At the other extreme, Malta does not allow divorce at all. In Austria, the spouse who is found solely or mainly responsible for the split has to financially support the innocent party. In Poland, there is a similar rule. While most EU states have agreed to try and establish a common divorce procedure, Sweden has opted out. It does not want its liberal divorce law compromised. An ex-Muslim woman, who chose to settle down in Europe because she was afraid of the Islamism in her native country, is on the side of the Swedes. She says that the Islamic laws are demeaning to women and violate their human rights. These laws state that a woman has no right to divorce unless her husband grants it, whereas he is free to divorce her at any time without her consent. Conservative Malta will not comply. This has put a spanner in the works. Malta has been criticized for being ‘extravagantly insensitive’ to the misery of hundreds of people across the EU who are trapped in unfair divorce procedures just because they chose to marry ‘foreigners’. Once one sees both sides of the coin, it becomes exceedingly difficult to voice an opinion. I fully sympathize with the ex-Muslim woman who came to Europe seeking justice. I believe that multicultural couples should think very seriously about the consequences of a divorce before they marry, and find a way to choose which country’s divorce laws will apply to them if it comes to divorce. Ultimately, harmonization of divorce procedure across the world and across religions can only serve to make things better for divorcing couples. It will no longer be a question of who gets there first.
Source: http://www.ArticlePros.com/author.php?James Walsh
|
