Labour to amend divorce bill as House starts debating second reading

The Labour Party plans to table amendments in parliament that will propose the introduction of fault-based property and asset separation in all divorce proceedings.

4 July 2011, 12:00am
by Nestor Laiviera

2 min read

Updated at 10:25am with Labour reaction.

The Labour Party has said the main principles of the divorce bill and those relating to no fault divorce are to remain unchanged.

The party was reacting to claims by sources that the Opposition intends to table amendments to the divorce bill in parliament, which will start being discussed in the House today.

"The bill will not be changed but certain parts will be clarified," a Labour spokesperson said. The debate will continue until July 13, when a vote on the bill’s second reading will be held.

Currently, the divorce bill under discussion provides spouses with the option to freely decide whether to proceed with a no-fault divorce, where the two jointly agree how the marriage assets, properties, and maintenance are allocated, or not.

Should one of the spouses wish to opt for a fault-based divorce, the proposed bill allows either spouse the right to request that the separation clauses within the Civil Code that deal with fault, and its consequences, apply to the divorce proceedings.

It is unclear why the PL is performing a U-turn, deciding to lobby for a fault-based divorce model after a referendum which approved a divorce law in its original (no-fault) form.

The second amendment that Labour will propose is aimed at tightening the bill’s clause on couples’ eligibility for filing for divorce.

In its amendment, the Opposition will propose that the requirement that spouses have lived apart for the previous four years out of five be amended to simply require that the spouses have lived apart for four years without interruption.

The existing clause was defended by the pro-divorce lobby, which said that requiring spouses to have lived apart four years out of five allowed them the freedom to try to reconcile, even during ongoing separation or divorce proceedings.

Should spouses be required to live apart for four years without interruption to be able to file for divorce, the pro-divorce lobby argued that spouses would have no motivation to explore reconciliation.