Categories
Family Law Law

Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020

Ministry of Injustice - Law and Justice

The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 is a piece of legislation in the United Kingdom that makes significant changes to the process of obtaining a divorce or dissolution of a civil partnership. The Act introduces a new “no-fault” divorce system and aims to simplify and modernize the process of ending a marriage or civil partnership.

The key changes introduced by the Act include:

  1. No-fault divorce: The Act introduces a new “no-fault” divorce system, allowing couples to apply for a divorce or dissolution without having to allege fault on the part of the other party, such as adultery or unreasonable behavior. Instead, they will only need to state that the marriage or civil partnership has irretrievably broken down.
  2. Joint applications: The Act allows couples to make a joint application for divorce or dissolution, rather than having to nominate one person as the petitioner.
  3. Removal of the possibility of contesting: The Act removes the ability for one party to contest the divorce or dissolution, making the process simpler and quicker.
  4. Minimum timeframe: The Act introduces a minimum timeframe of 20 weeks from the start of the divorce proceedings to the issuance of a conditional order, and a further 6 weeks from the issuance of the conditional order to the final order.

Overall, the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 represents a significant reform of the divorce process in England and Wales, moving towards a system that is more modern, amicable, and less adversarial. The Act aims to reduce conflict between couples and make the process of ending a marriage or civil partnership simpler, quicker, and less stressful for all involved.

Guidance from the President of the Family Division – The Right Honourable Sir Andrew McFarlane in relation to the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 was issued on the 28th March 2022.

Presidents-Guidance-Divorce-Dissolution-and-Separation-Act-2020-Costs-in-proceedings-for-matrimonial-and-civilDownload

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 2nd June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent