The incident, involving a dropdown menu mishap on an online portal, has sparked controversy and raised questions about the reliability of digital processes in legal matters.
ADVERTISEMENT
Law firm’s mistake causes wrong couple's divorce, judge says it can’t be reversed
A simple mistake by a law firm clerk has resulted in the irreversible divorce of a couple who did not intend to end their marriage.
Law firm’s mistake causes wrong couple's divorce, judge says it can’t be reversed
Recommended articles
The mishap occurred at the prestigious London law firm Vardags, led by Ayesha Vardag, dubbed the "diva of divorce." A Vardags clerk inadvertently selected the wrong couple, referred to in court as Mr. and Mrs Williams, from a dropdown menu on an online portal while processing divorce paperwork. The couple, who had been married for 21 years until their separation in 2023, were still sorting out financial arrangements when the erroneous divorce order was submitted.
Remarkably, the divorce was finalized in a mere 21 minutes, leaving the couple stunned and scrambling to rectify the error. Despite Vardags' efforts to overturn the divorce order, a senior judge, Sir Andrew McFarlane, president of the family division, refused to intervene, citing the importance of maintaining the finality and certainty of divorce decrees.
"There is a strong public policy interest in respecting the certainty and finality that flows from a final divorce order and maintaining the status quo that it has established," Sir McFarlane emphasized, as quoted by theguardian.com.
ADVERTISEMENT
File photo: Divorce
Pulse Ghana
Vardags, in its defence, acknowledged the mistake made by its employee but expressed dismay at the judge's decision. Ayesha Vardag criticized the ruling, arguing that allowing a clerical error to dictate such life-altering decisions undermines the principles of justice and intentionality upon which the legal system is built.
"The state should not be divorcing people on the basis of a clerical error," Vardag asserted. "There has to be intention on the part of the person divorcing because the principle of intention underpins the justice of our legal system."
Despite the firm's insistence that the error was unintentional and its subsequent plea for the divorce order to be rescinded, the judge maintained that such online processes entail multiple steps, suggesting that the final click initiating the divorce was not accidental.
"Like many similar online processes, an operator may only get to the final screen where the final click of the mouse is made after traveling through a series of earlier screens," Sir McFarlane clarified.
ADVERTISEMENT
The case has reignited debates about the role of technology in legal proceedings and the potential pitfalls of relying too heavily on digital platforms for sensitive matters such as divorce. As Mr and Mrs. Williams grapple with the unintended consequences of a misplaced click, the incident serves as a cautionary tale highlighting the need for greater vigilance and safeguards in online legal processes.
JOIN OUR PULSE COMMUNITY!
ADVERTISEMENT
Eyewitness? Submit your stories now via social or:
Email: eyewitness@pulse.com.gh
Recommended articles
Access to electricity is an important human right — World Bank
Bawumia's emotional moment of Christian worship steals spotlight at event [video]
The current power outages are ‘dumsie sie’; ‘dumsor’ only happened under Mahama – NAPO
I will make you multi-millionaires - Bawumia promises small scale miners
EPA staff suspend planned demonstration to allow for stakeholder engagement
Ejisu by-election: OSP investigates alleged bribery of EC staff by Kwadaso MP
Ghana improves in press freedom from 62nd position in 2023 to 50th in latest report
Tertiary education will be free for persons with disability if I win – Bawumia
