Civil Partnerships

Mary Minton has considerable experience in dealing with the dissolution of civil partnerships and can offer full representation or simply advise on the legal procedures, the completion of documentation and appropriate financial settlements.

Civil partnership dissolution is very similar to divorce. As with a marriage the civil partnership must have lasted at least one year before you can apply for a dissolution.

The documentation lodged at Court must establish that the civil partnership has ‘irretrievably’ broken down and this is established by using one of the following facts:

  • your partner has behaved unreasonably
  • you and your partner have been separated for two years, and that he or she will consent to the dissolution
  • you and your partner have lived apart for at least five years. It is not then necessary for your partner to agree to the dissolution
  • your partner deserted you at least two years ago.

Unlike divorce proceedings it is not possible to base the dissolution of a Civil Partnership on your partner’s adultery and if this was the reason for the breakdown of your relationship the petition would have to be based on unreasonable behaviour.

If it is less than 12 months since the date of the Civil Partnership, or you do not wish to bring the Civil Partnership to an end it is possible to obtain a separation order and we would be happy to discuss this with you.

Separating civil partners have the same financial legal remedies as divorcing couples including the right to claim maintenance, lump sum payments, property transfer and pension sharing/attachment orders. Often sorting the financial dispute out is the most difficult part of the process. We can advise fully on these aspects for you and always aim to negotiate an appropriate settlement for you without the need for lengthy and expensive court proceedings if at all possible.

Latest tweets

Clodes Solicitors
Clodes Solicitors
he principle of open justice is the starting point and its difficult to depart from.

In Various Claimants v Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, the Judge had the following to say -

"I refuse the Claimants' Application for anonymity (including being excused from the requirement to provide their addresses on the Claim Form) and reporting restrictions that would prevent their identification as Claimants in the action that they intend to bring. Neither of the reasons advanced in support of the application provides a sufficient basis for the grant of this derogation from the principle of open justice. The orders sought are not necessary either properly to maintain the administration of justice or to protect the legitimate interests of the Claimants. Less intrusive methods, that can be adopted in the proceedings, will properly protect those legitimate interests. The evidence in support of the Application is generalised, weak and falls a long way short of being clear and cogent".

Need to sell a co-owned property and one owner is refusing to sell? No problem contact us to resolve the matter on 02920765050 or click the link https://t.co/b77fYqKg1H https://t.co/LQLrze6Gsq CLODESSOLICITOR photo

Is an executor behaving unreasonably, are they favouring a beneficiary or being hostile ? Maybe it’s time to consider removing the executor, for more information click the link https://t.co/f2Blfm5Whf https://t.co/rx6JG95QO6 CLODESSOLICITOR photo

‘Don’t do ADR on the cheap’ ​industry experts warn | News | Law Gazette https://t.co/8X1WB723h4