Poll of the Day > Law firm accidentally divorces wrong couple after computer error

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68821406

A couple were divorced by mistake after a computer error at a family law firm.

A staff member at Vardag's accidentally opened the file of a couple referred to in court papers as Mr and Mrs Williams, when trying to apply for a final divorce order for a different client.

Vardag's applied three days later to rescind the order but judge Sir Andrew McFarlane dismissed the application.

The firm's head Ayesha Vardag said the judge's decision effectively meant "the computer says no, you're divorced".

The judge's logic is about as sound as Fandom's admins treating literally any picture as potentially hornyposting, so obviously he made the right call.

Reminder for the mods: Reporting news of a legal snafu is NOT POLITICS.
Have a nice day! :)

I wonder if they can just input into the computer that the order was rescinded. Then it will say they're not divorced.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/ae8fe401.jpg

That's pretty dumb.

I'm not sure what the consequences are though. Can't you just go back to a judge, maybe a smarter one, and get married again? If you didn't actually mean to divorce then no one is arguing over assets or anything.

Yea, 99% of divorce is basically splitting up of assets. Once everyone agrees to that, it is just signing the paperwork. So yea, seems odd that since there is no signature you can't really say that the couple "consents" to the divorce...

But I also don't understand UK laws, so maybe they don't need legal signatures to divorce. Also, other then a few states, you can pretty much get re-marred the same day your divorce is finalized.

Mistakes happen but why did the judge decline the request to rescind...?

Oh, I guess they do explain it, although that is a rather "it says we can't so we can't, mistake or no," response.

Solid_Sonic posted...

Mistakes happen but why did the judge decline the request to rescind...?

Rules are rules, no matter how little sense it makes. Now take your moderation....I mean, divorce ruling.

Seriously, it's the exact same energy, lol

I can kind of understand the rationale of the judge not rescinding the divorce just because the lawyers said they'd made a mistake, since that's a big decision to make without consulting the affected parties (though so is finalizing the divorce in the first place, so maybe that's where the extra scrutiny actually belongs), but doubling down on that when the affected parties are contesting the decision is indeed pretty weird. I get the vibe that the judge is using this as a protest against computer-based filing, as sort of a "look what your newfangled technology did, now I'm going to make you live with it."

SinisterSlay posted...

I'm not sure what the consequences are though. Can't you just go back to a judge, maybe a smarter one, and get married again? If you didn't actually mean to divorce then no one is arguing over assets or anything.

While it doesn't actually say it in the article, the fact that they only talk about Mrs. Williams petitioning for the decision to be reversed gives me the impression that the affected couple were in the process of getting a divorce of their own, and this order finalized it before everything had been sorted out (most likely in a state favouring Mr. Williams, given his lack of protest). I don't think it's a matter of just accidentally divorcing a happily married couple who could just get married again (possibly with the law firm footing the bill for the new certificate).

I'm pretty sure you require signatures to be divorced. It's not just an entry in a computer.

So you can divorce people against their will? Like casting a spell on people? So if you piss off your employer, he can divorce you from your wife as revenge?

Honestly, pretty shit judge, of course you can't do that.

Sounds to me like the couple that was divorced was already getting divorced but the error triggered it prematurely and the court refused to reverse it when they brought it to their attention.