Divorcing on the grounds of adultery

I'm avoiding totally - have chosen to sit it out and do the "separation" reason, I just didn't want to see it all in black and white to be honest and plus I'm being a bit of a coward in starting up the process

Hope your'e ok

S xx

I was advised exactly the same. If the third party doesn't admit it, then you literally have to prove that intercourse, including ejaculation, has taken place as I understand it.

I would name the 3rd party if that was the only option.

In my case I was divorcing my xh for unreasonable behaviour, and he decided to counter divorce for adultery ( I hadn't and would greatly have enjoyed watching him prove that one!). In the end it was all to do with costs, stupid man!

I was advised not to use adultery as my grounds at all, as the burden of proof would rest with me. I went on UB instead.

My solicitor told me that in this day and age it's absolutely not the done thing to name the third party and it makes no difference to the proceedings if there's a name or not. It also means an additional set of paperwork for the third party. So twonk of an ex did it anyway out of spite ?

Hope you're ok x

And if you had the proof? Both of the adultery and with the third person?

I would have thought if the other half (not the third party) denies the adultery, then you can discuss the evidence you have with your OH, and advise you will be divorcing on those grounds. So they know not to *** about, otherwise you will name them and use that evidence.

Missed Flump's post because this took aaaages to load

In summary I have proof (I will not go into it)

He has said that he will admit it.

I will need legal aid but my understanding is that this has to be paid back, however if the third party admits her part in it then the costs will be applied to the "guilty" parties. Namely them.

So I feel I have nothing to lose by naming and wondered if anyone else had done the same?

Sorry - meant to say, if they deny it in a face to face convo before anything's committed to paperwork...

I don't personally think it matters if it's the done thing or not. I think the important thing is to get it all over and done with ASAP, and with the least amount of hurt.

Personally, yes I would. I presume you've taken legal advice? I would follow your solicitors advice however. It's easy to get caught up in the emotion of it all.

I hope you're ok, it's a horrendous thing to have to go through. I do have to say, it was the best thing ever for me!

It doesn't matter if you name the third party, your OH will still have to pay the costs rather than you, the court doesn't make the respondent and the third party split the costs between them. However, the court doesn't care about the costs. They just make them agree to pay by signing the paperwork and it's up to you / your solicitor to get that money from them.

TBH, I really wouldn't name the third party unless you really are a vengeful soul!

Can you not go down the unreasonable behaviour route? It may make it easier for you in the long run.

My first marriage resulted in adultery (me not him) and he divorced me on those grounds, he did name the person and I did admit it but the judge refused to put the other mans name on the divorce cerificate and it was left as unknown. My solicitor said this was because children were involved primarily.

When I divorced my ex I did so on UB even though it could have been on adultery grounds but UB was said to be quicker and I wanted it done ASAP.

xx

I am not prepared to divorce him on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour, it seems wrong to me to lie like that and I was a little taken aback when my solicitor suggested it initially. The cause of the breakdown of my marriage was his adultery with this woman. He is the sort that would lie in future to my boys and pretend it was other than that if I did cite unreasonable behaviour. Hard to explain but I know what he is like and how he twists things to make himself appear the victim. If he and her both admit it then he will not be able to do that as easily IYSWIM?

It is not so many years ago that a spouse could refuse their partner a divorce. And again it is not so long ago that there needed to be grounds for divorce such as desertion, cruelty or adultery. One of the possible reasons why there are so many divorces today is because of the introduction of legislation approving no-fault divorce.

I didn't name the 3rd party, but as my xh didn't deny it it made no difference whether SHE was named or not

As others here have said... it was horrendous at the time but SOOOOOOOOOOOOO the best thing to ever happen to me!!!!! I am remarying a wonderful man in October and we have a gorgeous little girl!

best of luck X

Hi there, sorry to hear that you are going through this.

I divorced my first husband on the grounds of UB and my second Adultery, I didn't name anyone and he never contested it, in fact he didn't even get a solicitor! To be honest, the process and the timescale was pretty much the same for both.

Personally I wouldn't bother naming the third party, as it really doesn't make any difference to what is happening to you, my advise get the papers filed, go through the process and move on with your life. x