Case No. FD19F00071

26.On 16 March 2017 W issued a divorce petition in England. It was not served until much later. H relies heavily on its contents which include the assertion that the separation was 2 years prior. W denies ever saying such a thing and that the lawyers instructed on her behalf, but not by her, put that in without her instruction. As a result of a successful application made by H to me, the relevant parts of the solicitor’s file have been made available. In their different ways they provide some support for each party. 27.The files show that there is no evidence that W ever had any communication, direct or indirect, with the lawyers. Her only contact was through an intermediary who she said advised her that it was much easier to get a divorce on the ground of separation than adultery and who charged her an extortionate sum for providing a non-existent service. All the communication with the solicitors was through this middle-man. 28.The solicitors’ file refers to ‘3 years’, ‘no sex’ and ‘no communication’. Communications between the intermediary and solicitors refer in two places to a separation for the past 2 years. The intermediary approved the draft petition and it was signed on her behalf. W said that she was given no explanation of it and that her English was not good enough to enable her to understand its contents. 29.It is also relevant in this context to refer to W’s application for a non-molestation order which refers to a reconciliation in 2016. If there had not been a separation, says H, there could not have been a reconciliation. 30.This is all very valuable ammunition for H. He says that it accords with his case that they separated following the argument in April 2014. But, the reality of the situation is much better judged by the communications and contact that the parties were having between themselves in the period 2014-2017. This is particularly significant in the context of a couple who spent most of their time apart in any event. 31.After the argument on 1 April 2014 in Majorca, W and S returned to England for the commencement of S’s summer school term. They then went to Majorca as usual for the summer holidays and shared the Majorca home with H for some 8 weeks between July-September 2014, being the entirety of the summer school holidays. During that time they celebrated their wedding anniversary and, the following day, S’s birthday. In December 2014 H and W spent a week together in Italy, mainly at a spa hotel. They shared a bedroom. 32.In May 2015 H was in London for W’s birthday. He said he considered it was his duty to be with her for her birthday. As usual, he sent her white roses and treated her to dinner. 33.It was in February/March 2016 that H made his investment into W’s Majorca business. He agrees that in April 2016 they attempted a reconciliation. They spent W’s birthday together and I accept that he gave her a large sum of money to buy jewellery. In June 2016 he sent her his proposal for them to enjoy a holiday together in the sun in Thailand, Abu Dhabi or Miami over Christmas. In July 2016 they were together for what turned out to be H’s father’s last birthday, again sharing a bedroom. 34.The following year they were together again both for H’s birthday and W’s birthday in April/May respectively. Later in 2017 W went to Odessa to attend H’s father’s funeral with H. Once again they spent a significant part of the summer school holiday in Majorca. 35.Notwithstanding the row in April 2014 and arguments from time to time about money at a difficult time for H financially, it is clear to me that the parties still saw themselves as a couple. Their messages are generally of an affectionate nature. There are photographs of them presenting as a couple having a happy time. To the outside world, there had been little if any change in their domestic arrangements or the time that they spent together. There was no discussion between them before 2017 of separation or divorce, concepts with which they both had experience. 36.The parties disagree as to whether they were intimate between 2014-2017, but it is plain, contrary to H’s statement, that they shared a bedroom on many occasions. 37.It is accepted by H that he continued to pay a monthly allowance of the equivalent of about £400-£500 to W’s parents until March 2018 and to W in a much greater sum until July 2017. 38.It is clear to me that notwithstanding what might have been said in legal documents in 2017, the marriage did not come and was not perceived by either of them to have come to an end until a date in 2017. I therefore treat this as a marriage which endured between 2009-2017.