“We don’t speak, we don’t eat together, we don’t do anything together,” says the man in his 60, speaking about the breakdown of his marriage as he seeks a divorce at Dublin Circuit Family Court.
As his wife of more than 30 years sat at the back of the courtroom, he told Judge Elizabeth Maguire their marriage ended about five years ago but both remained living in their rented home, living “separate lives”. There is no reasonable prospect of reconciliation, he said.
Five years ago, he had, as a lay litigant, issued a civil bill seeking a divorce but his wife opposed that in favour of a judicial separation. He later instructed lawyers, a fresh civil bill for divorce was issued last March and terms had been agreed, his lawyer said.
The divorce decree, granted within 15 minutes after the terms are outlined, include the woman moving to a property of a deceased relative, valued at about €1 million, in which she had inherited a 25 per cent share.
Podcast: Terry Prone on allowing son Anton Savage to be in her publicity as a child: ‘I think it was the wrong thing to do’
Man who drowned off Galway coast named as singer-songwriter Johnny Duhan
Woman who alleges she was raped by Conor McGregor had ‘severe’ post-traumatic stress disorder, psychiatrist tells court
Owen Doyle: Ireland must ensure Scott Barrett’s claim about Joe McCarthy is not swept under the carpet
The man was gifted a 75 per cent share in that same property some years ago but issues arising from what share, if any, he was entitled to were resolved on terms. They include his wife releasing equity in the property to pay him a sum of €200,000 within six months as a contribution to his future accommodation. The couple had no children. He will pay spousal maintenance for a period and she will get 25 per cent of any death in service payment that might be made to him.
The man, who will have a pension pot of about €1 million on retirement from work, is planning to buy a property, the judge was told. The woman, who did not work outside the home during the marriage, planned to derive income from her property.
After the sombre hearing, the two separately leave court, the woman discreetly wiping her eyes.
In almost all of the cases before Judge Maguire at recent sittings attended by The Irish Times, the parties were legally represented. The judge sits in a court in Phoenix House, the glass building next to the Smithfield Luas stop and a stone’s throw from the Four Courts in Dublin’s north inner city.
In one case, however, a young woman, representing herself, obtained a divorce with the consent of her husband, who was also not represented by lawyers.
The two married a few years ago, but the marriage broke down after less than six months. They had lived apart since, have no children or jointly owned property and there is no prospect of reconciliation, the woman told the judge.
Their application was ruled on within three minutes and the two walked out of court together, the woman with tears in her eyes.
[ Tell us about your experience of divorce in Ireland Opens in new window ]
Legal sources say the minimum costs of a Circuit Court divorce application where parties are represented by lawyers range between €10,000 and €15,000 but costs can rise to multiples of that in complex cases or ones involving several interim applications to the court.
Those who meet the criteria for legal aid, including having disposable income under €18,000 annually, have most and, in some cases, all of their costs paid under the legal aid scheme.
Most divorce, judicial separation and cohabitation disputes are dealt with at the Circuit Courts but, under the Family Courts Bill, which is intended to create a dedicated and more user-friendly family courts within existing court structures, it is proposed to move those cases and others where the assets involve a land value, including the family home, of up to €1 million to the lower District Courts.
The Bar of Ireland and Law Society claim that will create a two-tier system in family law, with urban and more well-off litigants in a position to have their cases more speedily determined, while those with less resources and in rural areas will join long family law queues in the overstretched District Courts.
The plan, several family lawyers told The Irish Times, reflects a lack of awareness of the work involved in divorce and separation cases, including the estimated 70 per cent of cases that settle.
In Judge Maguire’s court, the atmosphere was often sad, reflecting the nature of the cases coming before her. As the cases were called one by one, the parties sat on chairs several feet apart at the back of the court. For the most part, they studiously avoided eye contact with each other.
A case involving a man and woman who married more than 25 years ago and have two dependent children had settled, the judge was told.
The divorce was sought by the woman who told the judge that the marriage broke down about five years ago, they have lived apart since and there is no prospect of reconciliation.
Both parties, their lawyers outlined, have limited incomes but have three mortgage-free properties, including the family home. One of the properties, located abroad, is uninhabitable and valued at about €15,000. Between them, they have about five pensions.
The agreed terms include the woman remaining in the family home, getting the foreign property and retaining a pension valued at about €100,000. He will keep the other Irish property and a company shareholding worth more than €120,000.
In granting the divorce, the judge addressed the parties in similar terms to those used by her in ruling other settlements.
They deserved “great credit” for being able to rise above their interpersonal difficulties and reach agreement, she said.
“It is always better to resolve things between yourselves rather than have a stranger like me impose something on you that may not be best thing,” said the judge.
[ We’re heading for an unfair, elitist two-tier divorce systemOpens in new window ]
From the comprehensive settlement, she could see there must have been “many twists and turns along the road before compromise was reached”, she said.
They will have many family occasions to attend in the future and because they would be able to say they were able to work things out, that sets a “good example”, she said.
“You were assisted in getting to this agreement by excellent legal representation,” she added.
Agreement was reached in another divorce application, brought by a man who married more than 20 years ago.
He first sought a divorce some years back. That was contested by his wife and court orders were made at that stage reflecting matters as they then stood, including the payment of maintenance for their children and the sale of the family home.
The children are no longer dependent, the woman has bought a property mortgage-free with her 65 per cent share of the family home sale proceeds and had received €49,000 for her interest in her husband’s company. The earlier orders also granted her spousal maintenance for a time and accrued benefits from one of his pensions.
An additional order was made by Judge Maguire under which the woman will be paid a lump sum of €15,000 from a UK pension.
In evidence, the man, aged in his 50s and a business owner, said he and his wife have lived apart now for more than 10 years. He told the court there is no reasonable prospect of reconciliation and he was satisfied the agreement made proper provision for both of them.
Judge Maguire praised both on reaching an agreement.
“I know you have been separate for a long number of years but I am sure you never thought when you married all those years ago you would end up here,” the judge told the woman who nodded, appearing close to tears. The woman looked over at the man who continued to look straight ahead.
Being satisfied the criteria were met, the judge granted a decree of divorce.
The judge dealt with several interim applications in other cases, which covered maintenance payments, pension adjustment orders and post-settlement disputes.
In one application, counsel for the woman said that an order for sale of the family home appeared to have “stalled” and her client was concerned her ex-husband may have had “an input into that”. After counsel for the man said they needed time to reply, the matter was put back to a date in June.
A divorce application by another woman could not be heard because her estranged husband, who is serving a long sentence for the rape of his daughter, was not in court.
He is seeking joint access to the daughter but was not present because his solicitor had not sought a production order to have him brought to the court from prison.
When the case was initially called, counsel for the man said her instructing solicitor, attached to a law centre, was on her way to court from a location outside Dublin.
After the man told the solicitor last November he no longer wanted her to represent him, the solicitor sought clarity from him in March and he told her he did not want her to seek a production order, the judge was told.
The solicitor, having sent an application to cease representing him, felt it was inappropriate to seek a production order, counsel said.
Counsel for the woman said her client was extremely distressed and wanted the case dealt with as soon as possible.
“He is still controlling her from prison,” she added, as the woman put her head in her hands and wept.
When the man’s solicitor arrived at court about 90 minutes later, the judge was told the solicitor had sent copies of her application to come off record for the man – meaning she would no longer be his lawyer – to the prison and to the Circuit Court office.
The judge said the application to come off record was not on her file and might be on the county registrar’s list. It was “incumbent” on the solicitor to have progressed it and to have sought a production order as the case had been specially fixed last November for that hearing.
The man had sent a letter to the county registrar last December seeking an adjournment to find a new solicitor, she noted.
Counsel for the man said there is a “huge volume” of work in the law centres and apologised to the weeping woman.
The judge said the situation was “disgraceful” but, in the man’s absence, she had no option but to adjourn the hearing. The man, she directed, must be produced in court on a date next month.
The case showed the long and complicated road that some face in the family courts.
Tell us your experience of divorce below. Please tell us if you wish to remain anonymous. We seek a phone number for verification purposes only.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis