Debunking divorce myths: Separating fact from fiction in farming families

Despite being a family law practitioner for the best part of 14 years, it continues to amaze me how many myths and misconceptions surround the question of divorce and, by extension, the division of assets on divorce.

As such, let’s look at three of the most common misconceptions that I still have to set straight on a regular basis, particularly in the context of a farming divorce.

Myth 1: I can get a quickie divorce

There is currently no such thing as a ‘quickie divorce’. Whilst you can get married in a matter of minutes, it can take many months to dissolve a marriage.

This myth has perhaps become most prevalent since the introduction of the ‘no-fault’ divorce.

Whilst the removal of the requirement to provide evidence of ‘conduct’ or ‘separation’ has led many to believe that the divorce process will be considerably quicker, unfortunately, the opposite is true. There are undoubted benefits to the removal of the ‘blame game’, but the process is also much slower thanks to the introduction of a compulsory 20-week ‘cooling-off’ period between the issue of the divorce application and the ability to apply for the Conditional Order. This does mean that the basic divorce process itself can take at least six to eight months to conclude.

Myth 2: What’s mine is mine

Clients will often indicate to me that they are entitled to retain those assets that they brought into the marriage – whether that is a parcel of land, a shareholding in a limited company, or a herd of cattle. Whilst such arguments can be sound and will often give rise to an assessment of those assets that are ‘matrimonial’ and those that are ‘non-matrimonial’, it does not automatically follow that rule.

Simply, because one party brought assets into a marriage does not mean that those assets will be ringfenced, particularly if the needs of the parties cannot be met without recourse to that non-matrimonial property.

Myth 3: The court can’t order a sale of the farm

Unfortunately, this is also incorrect. Whilst, for good reason, the court is reticent to sell the goose that lays the golden egg (pun intended), if a sale of land or the farm holding itself is the only way of realising funds to meet a settlement, then it falls within the power of the court to make such an order and the goose may well have to go to market for sale.

For all of the above reasons, it is essential that you seek early advice from one of our agriculture sector experts.