Why ‘unreasonable behaviour’ has become the little black dress of divorce

During a 65-second proceeding in central London, Sunetra Sastry was granted the decree nisi by a district judge. After the decree nisi is issued, it takes another six weeks before the divorce is finalised and becomes a decree absolute.
Married for 24 years, the pair filed for separation last year. Atkinson, 60, has since been in a relationship with 31-year-old comedian and actress, Lousie Ford.
But in an argument that has become all too popular in celebrity divorce proceedings, filing for ‘splitsville’ under the grounds of ‘unreasonable behaviour’ or ‘irreconcilable differences’ has become as common as the little black dress on the red carpet.
Remember Kaley Cuoco and Ryan Sweeting in September this year? The actress cited irreconcilable differences when filing for divorce. How about Madonna and Guy Richie? A sworn statement released by the court in 2008 showed Madonna petitioned for divorce on the grounds of Ritchie’s “unreasonable behaviour”.
In research carried out by The Co-operative Legal Services, it was revealed that ‘unreasonable behaviour’ is soaring as a reason behind marriage splits — accounting for almost half (47 per cent) of all divorces.
In a study that looked at five million UK divorces from 1970 — 2013, 29 per cent of marriages ended because of adultery in the 1970s, while the 2013 figures show only 15 per cent of divorces were down to infidelity. In the 1970s unreasonable behaviour was cited in just 28 per cent of cases but now accounts for almost half of all divorces — with reasons including: unsociable behaviour, being a workaholic and even cross-dressing.
So what else constitutes as ‘unreasonable behaviour’ in a married partnership? And why has it become the most popular way to end a marriage?
“Unreasonable behaviour is a term used in the English and Welsh courts. In Australia the only ground for divorce is irretrievable breakdown of marriage as evidenced by the parties living apart for one year,” Heather McKinnon of Slater & Gordon said.
“In England and Wales most people now cite unreasonable behaviour because it allows them to get divorced within a year and the judges are very lenient in what they find to be unreasonable behaviour.”
The use of ‘unreasonable behaviour’ is used extensively within high-profile cases because of the privacy nature of the Application.
“As in Australia, the public in England and Wales, including the media are not allowed to know what the unreasonable behaviour is so we can only guess at the facts couples use in their Application citing unreasonable behaviour,” Heather said.
“The cases that are published cite things like psychological abandonment, incidences of family violence less than six months before the filing of the application, social isolation or economic deprivation.”
Today, especially in the UK, judges are very unlikely to reject an application if there is a sensible paragraph about why someone’s spouse acted unreasonably and led them to want to divorce their partner.
“Australia showed great social maturity in 1975 in removing from unhappy spouses the burden of proving the matters that people in England and Wales still have to put before their courts,” Heather said.
“There is enough grief in the breakdown of a marriage without having to add additional stress by the undignified filing of paperwork on very private and painful episodes that are inevitably present in the breakdown of all marriages. In Australia, living apart for a year is all that we need to prove to get divorced.”