Expensive " Legal Eagles " !

Early last century,  dissolving a marriage in the divorce court was a time consuming  scandal that put an end to many careers and ruined reputations.   The law at that time insisted that a " guilty party " be named - and shamed by being held responsible for the marriage breakup.

A swifter divorce could be gained by proving one of the applicants had been guilty of adultery, but otherwise the couple were required to serve years of separation before the judge would grant a legal divorce and this sort of misery was inflicted differently in every state.

Usually, the guilty party was punished by the distribution of the lesser share of assets from the marriage, and many churches refused to allow divorced people to participate in their services.  The divorce court was rife with carefully staged plots to show the innocent partner in a bad light.

 Than came the enlightenment of " no fault " divorce and the Family Court was created to justly and fairly end impossible marriages.  The welfare of any children was paramount and it was expected most divorces would need minimum legal representation before the court.

Unfortunately, this new Family court became the battleground for wealthy people to contest every minor issue in property settlements and rake over matter that has no bearing on what the court seeks to divide, and they are aided by some members of the legal fraternity who encourage this form of combat because it adds to their billing hours.

In one notable Sydney divorce, a woman seeking freedom from her husband who controlled  two hundred million in assets ended up with a six million dollar legal bill.  She had pawned her jewellery, sold paintings from the walls of her home and borrowed money from relatives to fund the four years this litigation took to wend its way through the Family court.

Both parties retained some of the best known and  highest charging family lawyers in Sydney and bitterly fought every move and counter move to gain an advantage.  It is fast becoming the practice  to steer such divorce action towards litigation funders because the lawyers get their money up front.

.   Often this results in the law firm agreeing to take the case for a fixed fee, on the understanding that thirty percent of the monetary divorce settlement will be claimed by the lawyer.  This is a form of payment shunned by many law firms.

The public is usually unaware of this practice.  On one occasion a wealthy man engaged a law firm that had been admonished by a judge for running up a large bill with futile applications and  irrelevant correspondence, although this solicitor's name was redacted from the judgement. In this case the client was charged double what was considered a fair fee and ordered to reduce it accordingly.

Unfortunately, despite the best intent of the Family court, divorce can still be both acrimonious - and expensive.  It will remain that way as long as the people involved are also seeking a moral victory and engage lawyers with profit in mind  !