Flying Solo In The Divorce Court?

Heather Mills is now acting in person in what could potentially be the biggest ever divorce settlement in English legal history. 

What does acting in person mean? It means deciding against using a lawyer or barrister to act for you and doing the paperwork and representing yourself in court.

For many people in more modest circumstances than the McCartneys, the prospect of saving the legal fees is a compelling factor in acting in person. It is hard to get legal aid these days if you have moderate means. And no one enjoys paying lawyers!

However, the question is whether the understandable desire to save money on legal fees is worth it in the end. If you don’t do a great job of presenting your case, and the final outcome is disappointing, saving the legal fees may be poor consolation. You may end up having to pay a lawyer to rectify problems that might have been avoided if they had been involved from the outset.

In addition, preparing, running and presenting a legal case is time-consuming. For example, could you meet court deadlines for the filing of complex financial or legal documents? Do you know how to obtain technical financial paperwork promptly? Can you get time off work to attend a number of hearings, if needs be?

The courts do try to take great care that anyone acting for him or herself understands the process and argument, but it is unusual for a lay person to master the intricacies of English matrimonial law. It is discretionary by nature and there are no “hard and fast” rules about who gets what. It is important to be well-versed in recent case law and statute to understand what issues might influence a judge’s thinking.

Some people, want to “have their day in court”, unfiltered by the cautious and objective words of lawyers. They may feel that the legal process is too impersonal and doesn’t really allow them to convey directly to a judge how they view their case.
However, any litigant who believes that a judge is likely to make an order based on the subjective view of a spouse is mistaken.

A judge has a defined aim in divorce hearings. He must create an order which is objectively fair to both parties. In most cases, the allegations that spouses make against each other originate in the emotional maelstrom of the marriage breakdown. They are important to the couple, but rarely to a judge, who creates a financial foundation for their future. What is relevant to a party involved in the marriage breakdown may not be relevant to the judge ; a great deal of time and money is often wasted by pursuing “red herrings”.

Some people are very successful in acting for themselves in court. For the majority, however, divorce is one of the most difficult times in life. Adding to that stress by preparing a legal case and facing one’s spouse across a courtroom can simply be too difficult. 

For more information or advice, contact Yvette Rooke

Published 20/02/2008. The author of this article is Yvette Rooke