In Ireland, the Divorce Act requires that (a) the parties have lived apart for at least four of the five years before proceedings are issued. This does not necessarily mean that they were living in separate houses; (b) at least one of the parties is domiciled in the Republic of Ireland or has lived there for a year before starting the action; (c) there is no reasonable prospect of reconciliation and (d) both parties, as well as any children, are properly provided for.

Another possibility is to seek a decree of nullity, which means that the marriage never existed. The most common ground for a decree of nullity is that, at the time they married, the spouses were unable to "enter into and sustain a normal marital relationship". Such a claim is normally based on the psychological condition of one or both spouses. A decree of nullity allows people to marry other people, as if the former "marriage" never existed. There is no minimum waiting time and it may provide a way to avoid the financial burden of a divorce.

DOMICILE AND RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DIVORCES ACT 1986

SECT 5

Recognition of foreign divorces.

5.?(1) For the rule of law that a divorce is recognised if granted in a country where both spouses are domiciled, there is hereby substituted a rule that a divorce shall be recognised if granted in the country where either spouse is domiciled.

(2) In relation to a country which has in matters of divorce two or more systems applying in different territorial units, this section shall, without prejudice to subsection (3) of this section, have effect as if each territorial unit were a separate country.

(3) A divorce granted in any of the following jurisdictions?

( a ) England and Wales,

( b ) Scotland,

( c ) Northern Ireland,

( d ) the Isle of Man,

( e ) the Channel Islands,

shall be recognised if either spouse is domiciled in any of those jurisdictions.

(4) In a case where neither spouse is domiciled in the State, a divorce shall be recognised if, although not granted in the country where either spouse is domiciled, it is recognised in the country or countries where the spouses are domiciled.

(5) This section shall apply to a divorce granted after the commencement of this Act.

(6) Nothing in this section shall affect a ground on which a court may refuse to recognise a divorce, other than such a ground related to the question whether a spouse is domiciled in a particular country, or whether the divorce is recognised in a country where a spouse is domiciled.

(7) In this section?

"divorce" means divorce a vinculo matrimonii;
"domiciled" means domiciled at the date of the institution of the proceedings for divorce.

See

Domicile law in Ireland

Ireland - Financial Settlements in Divorce Cases Can be Re-negotiated at any Time

A MOTHER of five has won an extra €2 million in a shock divorce ruling that could force ex-partners to pay their former spouses additional monies if their wealth increases after they split up.

The High Court judgment means financial settlements in divorce cases can be re-negotiated at any time and also means ex-partners are liable for maintenance even after they die.

Last night, legal experts said the ruling creates a new precedent in Irish divorce law, obliging ex-partners to support their former spouses for life, making full and final agreements impossible. 

“In the past it was suggested that the opportunity for further provision in a divorce settlement ended with the granting of the decree of divorce,” said family law expert and solicitor Geoffrey Shannon. “This case suggests that this might not necessarily be the position. This means parties in divorce cases can effectively get another bite of the cherry after their divorce and it will send shivers down the spine of those who think their settlements are final.”

The case centres on a pair, who cannot be named for legal reasons, who married in 1979, had five children and divorced in 2000. At the time of their divorce, the court ordered the businessman husband to pay £48,500 a year to his wife and children. The settlement was based on his wealth at the time of the divorce but after the split he sold his business and became richer. The High Court ruled the man must pay his wife a one-off lump sum of €2m to reflect this increase.

Previously, parties in marriage breakdowns could come to a financial settlement at the first stage of splitting up — the decree of judicial separation — or the final step called a decree of divorce. The agreement made at the time of a decree of divorce was thought to be final but the High Court has now said settlements can be re-negotiated as ex-partners have an obligation to support their spouses for life.

Mr Shannon, whose book on 10 years of Irish divorce law comes out this year, said the ruling would benefit ex-wives struggling to support their families. “What you are looking at is divorce Irish-style and it’s different from the reality in other jurisdictions because we have a life-long spousal support obligation,” said Mr Shannon.  

Irish Examiner 18 May 2007

"Ireland's Divorce Courts a Shambles"

Ireland's divorce courts are overloaded and need a complete overhaul to make breaking up fairer and less of a bank-breaking ordeal, an expert report on the secrecy-shrouded system concluded Tuesday.

The government-commissioned report, which offered 45 recommendations to fix the system, faulted the government for doing much too little since the 1997 legalization of divorce in this predominantly Roman Catholic country. Justice Minister Brian Lenihan vowed to make improvements a priority.

The author, Irish Times reporter Carol Coulter, was the first outside expert permitted to witness divorce cases, which are typically conducted without transcripts or detailed written judgments. She spent a year gathering data and testimony on proceedings normally barred to media and other spectators.

Her 82-page report said it was common for crowds of breaking-up couples and their lawyers to be kept waiting around court all day — only for their day in court to be put back for months, even in cases involving a child's welfare. "They must then steel themselves to go through it all again," she said.

Coulter said the problems and potential miscarriages of justice were greatest in provincial towns, where courts set aside time for matrimonial cases only four days out of every month, or less.

"The pressure on the lists forces judges to try to cram as many cases as possible into a day. In such circumstances it is impossible for written judgments to be given, or even for an outline to be given of the judge's reasons for making his or her orders," she wrote.

Throughout the country, she said, the system discouraged people from solving their cases through mediation or other means short of a courtroom confrontation. High legal costs forced some people to represent themselves, slowing down business further.

"According to some practitioners and court staff, in places where delays are very long, people can end up settling on terms they are unhappy with, just to bring an end to the proceedings," she said, adding that some judges worked marathon sessions from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. to try to catch up.

The wishes of children often were not taken directly into account, even though internationally it is common for children's views to play an important role in determining custody, she said.

She said judges, hobbled by a lack of written judgments for reference, "expressed to me their own frustration at the lack of education and training for judges, and at the difficulty in discovering what their colleagues' understanding and practice of family law is."

Irish law permits a couple to file for divorce only after they have been separated for a minimum of four years, a rule intended to give them time to reconcile. Divorce lawyers say this rarely happens. But the delay does encourage more protracted court proceedings involving separate court hearings for separation and divorce.

The Associated Press,
Tuesday, October 30, 2007