```html IN THE GRAND COURT OF THE CAYMAN ISLANDS FAMILY DIVISION CAUSE NO：FAM 0199/2016 BETWEEN： M.C. APPLICANT/RESPONDENT C.C. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER Appearances： Ms. Sheridan Brooks Q.C. of Brooks & Brooks on behalf of the Applicant/Respondent Mr. Kerri Cox of HSM on behalf of the Respondent/Petitioner Before： The Hon. Mr. Justice Charles Quin Q.C. Heard： Tuesday 7th March 2017 Judgment delivered： Friday 10th March 2017 HEADNOTE Matrimonial Causes Law - Matrimonial Causes Rules - Strike out application for Petition - Incomplete and improper pleadings. ```
```html JUDGMENT 1 2 3 4 This is the hearing of a Summons issued by the Respondent (the “wife”) on the 1st December 2016 for the following relief: 5 6 a. That the Petition of the husband dated the 13th October 2016 be struck out. 7 8 b. That further and/or in the alternative, the Order providing the content of the 9 Petition be set aside 10 11 c. That the wife be granted an extension of time in which to file her Answer and 12 Cross-Petition in the terms attached. 13 14 d. That the husband do pay the costs of this application to the Legal Aid Fund. 15 16 2. On the 10th November 2016 I granted an order that the facts and matters stated in the 17 Petition were proved and I adjourned the ancillary matters to chambers. 18 19 3. The main grounds on which the wife submits the husband’s Petition should be struck 20 out and the Order providing the content of the Petition be set aside are as follows. 21 22 4. That in paragraph 4 of the said Petition the husband pleads “(T)hat there have been no 23 previous proceedings brought by the parties hereto in any Court.....” 24 25 5. The wife submits that this statement was wrong and untrue as the husband and his then 26 attorney were aware that on 22nd August 2016 legal proceedings were commenced in 27 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 28 Summary Court of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 29 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 30 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 31 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 32 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 33 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 34 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 35 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 36 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 37 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 38 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 39 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 40 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 41 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 42 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 43 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 44 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 45 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 46 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 47 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 48 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 49 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 50 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 51 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 52 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 53 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 54 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 55 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 56 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 57 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 58 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 59 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 60 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 61 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 62 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 63 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 64 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 65 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 66 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 67 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 68 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 69 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 70 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 71 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 72 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 73 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 74 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 75 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 76 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 77 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 78 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 79 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 80 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 81 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 82 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 83 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 84 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 85 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 86 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 87 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 88 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 89 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 90 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 91 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 92 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 93 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 94 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 95 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 96 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 97 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 98 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 99 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 100 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 101 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 102 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 103 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 104 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 105 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 106 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 107 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 108 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 109 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 110 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 111 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 112 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 113 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 114 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 115 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 116 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 117 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 118 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 119 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 120 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 121 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 122 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 123 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 124 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 125 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 126 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 127 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 128 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 129 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 130 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 131 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 132 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 133 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 134 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 135 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 136 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 137 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 138 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 139 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 140 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 141 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 142 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 143 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 144 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 145 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 146 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 147 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 148 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 149 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 150 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 151 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 152 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 153 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 154 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 155 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 156 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 157 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 158 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 159 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 160 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 161 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 162 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 163 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 164 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 165 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 166 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 167 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 168 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 169 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 170 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 171 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 172 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 173 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 174 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 175 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 176 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 177 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 178 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 179 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 180 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 181 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 182 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 183 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 184 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 185 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 186 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 187 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 188 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 189 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 190 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 191 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 192 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 193 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 194 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 195 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 196 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 197 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 198 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 199 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 200 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 201 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 202 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 203 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 204 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 205 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 206 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal proceedings were commenced in the 207 the Surt of the Cayman Islands of legal
```html Furthermore, the wife's leading counsel submits that that the Summary Court had made at least one order of which both the husband and his then attorney were aware. Accordingly, leading counsel on behalf of the wife submits that this pleading in the husband's Petition was inaccurate and misleading. In addition the wife's leading counsel submits that paragraph 9 of the Petition is an erroneous and invalid pleading as paragraph 9 alleges: “That the marriage between the parties has broken down irretrievably without any chance of reconciliation due to the fact that the [wife] has behaved n such an unreasonable manner towards the Petitioner/husband who finds it intolerable to live any longer with her.” Ms. Brooks Q.C. submits that no such ground for divorce exist under the provisions of the Matrimonial Causes Law (the “Law”) to properly plead the husband's Petition. In effect, the wife complains that the husband has conflated two separate grounds in his Petition for the dissolution of the marriage: Section 10(1)(a) of the Law provides: “(a)The respondent has committed adultery and the petitioner finds it intolerable to live with the respondent” and Section 10(1)(b) of the Law provides: “(b) The respondent has behaved in such a way that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent.” ```
```html 1 8. Therefore Ms. Brooks submits that the husband has not properly pleaded either of 2 these grounds but, instead, has pleaded a combination of both, which renders the 3 husband's Petition invalid. 4 9. The wife's leading counsel also objects to the fact that the husband has named a third 5 party in the particulars of unreasonable behaviour and submits that, as this person has 6 been named, he should be served as a co-respondent and given an opportunity to 7 defend himself. 8 10. Finally, the wife has exhibited a draft Answer denying the husband's allegations of her 9 unreasonable behaviour and pleads that the husband is guilty of unreasonable 10 behaviour and her Answer has set out her allegations of the husband's unreasonable 11 behaviour. ``` This is a faithful transcription of the page, using Markdown for headings and paragraph structure, HTML for tables, and LaTeX for math. The content is based on the visible text in the image.
```markdown # HUSBAND'S POSITION
The husband's counsel, Mr. Cox, argues that although the Petition is far from being a model pleading, the basic ground of "unreasonable behaviour" on the part of the wife has been pleaded with full particulars of unreasonable behaviour set at paragraphs 5 (a) to (r).
The husband's verifying affidavit deposes to the fact that the wife has behaved unreasonably during the marriage. The husband repeats the particulars of unreasonable behaviour in the verifying affidavit and then reverts to the correct wording as in s.10(1)(b) of the Law in the Petition "that he cannot reasonably be expected to continue living with the wife."
Mr. Cox submits that there is a irretrievable breakdown of the marriage with no hope of any reconciliation. Mr. Cox highlights the fact that both the husband and the wife agree that there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage and submits with some force that it would be in the interest of both parties to agree a more neutral and less acrimonious way forward in these proceedings.
Mr. Cox accepts that there were proceedings before the Summary Court between the parties for maintenance for the wife and the minor child. It is the husband's position that, in any event, these Summary Court proceedings will, in effect, be subsumed by the Grand Court as part of the ancillary matters to be adjudicated upon at a later date. ```
```html 1 16. On the 2nd December 2016 this matter came before Williams J who directed that the 2 the wife's Summons to strike out the husband's Petition be listed before me. 3 17. On the 12th December 2016 the husband changed his attorneys from Philip Ebanks of 4 H Philip Ebanks, Attorneys at Law to Mr. Cox of HSM Law. 5 18. On the 12th January 2017 this matter was again before Williams J who noted that the 6 the parties should negotiate to see if they can reach an agreement on the issue of the 7 proving of the husband's Petition and move forward on the Petition on an uncontested 8 basis. Williams J further suggested that a consent order should be considered and that 9 he would be willing to deal with the issue administratively. 10 19. I have to say that it is regrettable for all concerned that the parties and their attorneys 11 have been unable to follow Williams J's wise and sensible advice. ```
```html CONCLUSION 20. I acknowledge that the Petition does not plead one of the grounds set out in s.10(1)(a) - (e) of the Law. In some respects it is a highly technical objection, in that the Petition failed to plead that the husband "cannot reasonably be expected to live with the wife." 21. In MD v ED' Mangatal J addressed flawed pleadings in Family cases. At paragraph 11 of her judgment the learned Judge says “In my judgment the Petitioner has failed to plead proper grounds in that she has yet to allege in her Petition that she cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent as a result of the behaviour described by her in the Petition as being unreasonable.” The learned Judge goes on to add: “Describing the behaviour as unreasonable is insufficient.” 22. Similarly Mangatal J continues at paragraph 13 in MD v ED - in relation to the ground of adultery - the Petitioner failed to plead the words of s.10(1)(a) of the Law and the learned Judge stated: “As regards adultery, I agree that this has not been properly pleaded nor has the Petitioner pleaded “and the Petitioner finds it intolerable to live with the Respondent.” 23. At paragraph 14 of her judgment Mangatal J refers to the judgment of Williams J in CMS states: v RGS2 and 1 Unreported - FAM 6/15 - distributed to counsel on the 15th March 2016 2 FAM 177 of 2013 Judgment. Cause No. FAM 199/2016. M.C v C C -. Coram Quin J. Date: 10.03.17 Page 7 of 9 ```
```html 1 In CMS v RGS at paragraphs 60-65, Williams J discusses the grounds for divorce 2 and, in relation to ground 10(1)(b), the importance of that aspect of the ground 3 consisting of that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the 4 Respondent." 5 24. At paragraph 17 Mangatal J sets out the important principle with which I agree and 7 adopt: 8 Although rules as to pleadings have become more relaxed it nevertheless remains 9 the case that they are necessary to delineate the case to be tried." 10 11 The learned Judge then struck out the Petition and made no order as to costs. 12 25. It is for exactly the same reason that I herein strike out the Petition of the husband 13 dated the 13th October 2016 and set aside my Order of the 10th November 2016. 14 26. Although the wife seeks an order for costs against the husband I am going to following 15 Mangatal J's order in MD v ED and make no order as to costs. 16 27. In the wife's acknowledgment of service dated the 31st October 2016 and signed by the 17 wife and her attorneys, Brooks & Brooks, she indicated that she intended to defend the 18 Petition. 19 28. The wife failed to file an Answer (or any Cross Petition) within fourteen (14) days 20 pursuant to r.12(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Rules (the "Rules"). 21 The wife was applying for legal aid does not relieve her of the obligation 22 necessity to issue the Summons before me today. Judgment. Cause No. FAM 199/2016. M.C v C C -.Coram Quin J. Date: 10.03.17 Page 8 of 9 ```
```html 1 30. In addition, I accept my own mistake in not picking up the husband’s failure to plead 2 “and cannot reasonably be expected to live with the wife” when I acceded to the 3 application for an order that the Petition be proved on the 10th November 2016. 4 31. Accordingly, I make the same order as Mangatal J did in MD v ED and strike out the 5 Petition with no order as to costs. 6 32. I do express my sincere hope that the parties, with the assistance of their very 7 experienced Family counsel, will try to agree the wording of a Petition which will 8 remove the unnecessary acrimonious allegations and counter allegations of 9 unreasonable behaviour, and follow Williams J’s helpful and sensible advice. 10 11 Dated this the 10th day of March 2017 12 13 Honourable Mr. Justice Charles Quin Q.C. 14 Judge of the Grand Court