The Journal, March 2006, page 26
In his article entitled “Quiet Revolutions” in January’s edition of The Journal (page 20) Kenneth Norrie refers to what he describes as the “religification” (a somewhat curious neologism) of Scottish family law. Fortunately, the Scottish Parliament proved itself to be somewhat more compassionate than he in realising that the civil law can indeed be invoked to assist the plight of divorcing Jewish couples, as has been happening for some years in Canada and South Africa, as well as England and Wales. Separation of church and state may be appropriate in many spheres of political endeavour, but it is interesting to note that America, the official home of such separation, has enacted similar legislation in New York State.
The Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 received Royal Assent on 20 January 2006. Accordingly, certain fundamental changes are soon to be made to the divorce laws of Scotland that will affect Jewish spouses. An amendment concerning religious divorce – in this context meaning Jewish divorce – was made by section 15 of the Act, adding a new section 3A to the Divorce (Scotland) Act 1976. A recent parliamentary answer disclosed that a commencement date is expected in the late spring or early summer.
Section 3A provides for “Postponement of decree of divorce where religious impediment to remarry exists”. The impediment is caused by the husband refusing to grant the “get” (Jewish divorce) or the wife refusing to accept it. Although most Jewish divorces are obtained without difficulty, each case of refusal potentially entails very serious problems, including the inability to remarry according to the laws of Orthodox Judaism. Simply expressed, the new law provides that, if one spouse is not co-operating with obtaining the get, the other spouse (“the applicant”) may apply to the court for the decree of divorce to be postponed until the get has been obtained. The application may be made “notwithstanding that irretrievable breakdown of a marriage has been established”.
The court will have discretion whether or not to grant the order postponing the decree, and will only grant it if satisfied that the applicant is prevented from entering into a further religious marriage because the husband refuses to grant the get or the wife refuses to accept it (cf section 3A(2)), and that “it is just and reasonable” (subsection (1)(b)(ii)) to grant the order postponing the decree of divorce.
Section 3A will assist Jewish spouses in achieving their objective of obtaining the get where one of them is not co-operating and wants the civil divorce, but not the get. While not every spouse will be able to benefit from this law, it will undoubtedly help most spouses who find themselves in this invidious situation – despite Professor Norrie’s comments to the contrary – as experience in other jurisdictions demonstrates.
The court can recall the postponement at any time. This would normally happen when the get has been obtained, following which, the civil divorce would be granted. Before recalling a postponement, the court may require a certificate to be given by “a relevant religious body” (section 3A(5)). The “religious body” will effectively be a Beth Din (court of Jewish religious law: plural Batei Din), which may be required by the court to certify that the get has been obtained. The spouse who has made the successful application for postponement will be the one who considers that the “relevant” Beth Din is acceptable (subsection (6)).
Readers will benefit from being alert to the implications of this definition, as there are several groupings within Judaism, the original and mainstream one being known as Orthodox or traditional Judaism. It follows that the “relevant religious body” (or Beth Din) that certifies that the get has been obtained may be Orthodox, or non-Orthodox, the latter being Masorti (Conservative) or Reform, as each Beth Din provides its own form of get. The Union of Liberal and Progressive Synagogues (ULPS) is another such “religious body” which is non-Orthodox, but it permits a couple to remarry without a prior religious divorce.
It would be useful to be aware that, if divorcing spouses who are Halachically Jewish (i.e. their ancestors on the maternal side were Jewish, as recognised by an Orthodox Beth Din, or they have undergone a conversion to Orthodox Judaism) wish to have their get universally recognised throughout the Jewish world, only a get from an Orthodox Beth Din will suffice. A get from any other Beth Din does not gain this universal recognition. Civilly divorced spouses who have subsequently remarried and gone on to have children in ignorance of this fact have suffered enormously (especially the children subsequently born to the divorced wife) due to a lack of awareness of the religious laws. In-depth coverage of these issues is to be found at www.gettingyourget.co.uk, an e-book about Jewish divorce which contains articles, forms and explanations for solicitors and which has received judicial endorsement from Lady Cosgrove.
This law could be equally applicable to other religions whose members have similar difficulties when divorcing, but so far no other religion has opted for this.
DEANNA LEVINE MA LLB NP is a dual qualified Scottish and English solicitor and consultant to Barnett, Alexander Conway Ingram, London. She is Honorary Secretary of the United Kingdom Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists and a member of the Family Law Group of the Board of Deputies.
Current Issue FeaturesBraving the stormHow different types of legal firm are coping with the current economic downturn, and how they see their future Civil justice: where next?An abridged version of the keynote address delivered to the conference on civil justice held in Edinburgh on 20 June Title Conditions Act: new registration proceduresNew procedures are in place for deeds intended to create new real burdens, to assist solicitors in complying with the requirement for dual registration Young lawyers rebornInterview with Scottish Young Lawyers Association President Maryam Labaki on SYLA's ambitions as it relaunches Shining some more light...Second part of overview of this year's Finance Act looks at the provisions on savings, pensions, residence/domicile and business taxes, among others Power to the tribunal?An advocate's and a solicitor's views of how the Scottish Government's proposed reforms to arbitration law might work in practice Piece by pieceA progress report from England & Wales on the setting up of the complex regulatory machinery under the Legal Services Act 2007 The poor in our midstInterview with Scottish Solicitors' Benevolent Fund convener Craig Bennet, who aims to raise awareness of the Fund so it can provide more help to those in need Current Issue ArticlesShifting sandsPresident's message: with economic issues dominating the profession's thoughts, the Society is taking steps to provide advice and support to those in need A rank bad ruleOpinion by two advocates that the Faculty's response to the OFT does its members a disservice by defending the cab rank rule and by resisting the use of ABS The Society's future role in complaints handlingA reminder, in the light of reactions to the first levy issued on behalf of the new Complaints Commission, of when and how the Society's responsibilities are changing Appreciation: Lord JohnstonReport of the tribute paid in court by the Lord President Professional Practice CommitteeNew guidelines on acting as a company director; and document control and file tracking Facing the lean yearsSome advice on how to pull through a recession and be ready for the next upturn, as word goes round of legal firms looking at staff cuts and other measures (part 1 of 2) It's a web 2.0 worldThe interactive nature of web 2.0 technology presents business opportunities, while posing new risks for those with inadequate precautions as to employee internet use Questions, questionsIn reviewing their risk profiles and risk controls, all firms might benefit from conducting a self-assessment by addressing questions put by some insurers elsewhere Bare necessitiesLatest criminal cases, including offensive weapons; Moorov rule; withdrawal of representation; evidence of a deceased; contempt of court by solicitor Coming on the blind sideA technical-sounding consultation, currently open for comments, covers some significant aspects of dispute resolution in employment Relocation, relocationA recent decision explores the matters to consider when one parent wants to relocate abroad along with their child Worse than the disease?Has the UK quietly outlawed "alternative" medicine through the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations? Sleeping bountyThe Scottish Community Foundation has a scheme to breathe new life into dormant charitable trusts Scottish Solicitors' Discipline TribunalReports relating to Eileen Agnes Coogans; Zosia Marion Elizabeth Fraser; Annaline Webster; Ian Samuel Gerard Donnelly; Mark David Sheppard Website reviewsReviews of sites of organisations concerned with domain name disputes Book reviewsReview of Child and Family Law (Sutherland) Industry standardA survey south of the border suggests that in-house work in commerce and industry doesn't always match expectations - but most in-house lawyers expect to stay Meet the committeeProfile of In-house Lawyers Group committee member Sara Scott What's in a motto?A sample of In-house Lawyers Group members' notarial mottoes, collected by ILG secretary Tricia Sim Leasing by example"Green leases" appear to be some way off yet for the UK, but a Canadian model now published shows how they might work Good call?Reply to article questioning the Donald Trump planning application call-in argues that the decision is both competent and consistent with proper operation of the system Home reports - the practice questionsOpen letter over reservations as to the Society's proposed guidelines on the operation of home reports, in so far as they deal with conflict of interest |