The introduction of no-fault divorce in April 2022 marked a major step forward for accessibility and simplicity in family law. However, the shift in terminology brought by the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 is creating unintended consequences. Misunderstandings about what a ‘Final Order’ means are leaving many people exposed to financial risk long after their marriage has legally ended.

From Latin to plain English - and new challenges

For 145 years, divorce proceedings relied on terms like ‘Petition’, ‘Petitioner’, ‘Decree Nisi’ and ‘Decree Absolute’. These were replaced in 2022 with simpler alternatives: ‘Application’, ‘Applicant’, ‘Conditional Order’ and ‘Final Order’. The aim was to make the process easier for people to navigate without legal advice.

While the new language is more user-friendly, it has introduced ambiguity. A ‘Final Order’ in divorce sounds definitive, yet it only concludes the divorce itself, not the financial claims arising from the marriage. This confusion is leading to costly mistakes.

Real-world impact

Since the changes came into effect, many individuals have assumed that receiving a Final Order also settles financial matters. In one case, a client invested thousands in home improvements after their divorce was finalised, only to discover their former spouse could still claim a share of the increased property value. Fortunately, that dispute was resolved amicably, but not all cases end so smoothly.

The Supreme Court case of Wyatt v Vince is a stark reminder. The couple divorced in 1992, but 24 years later, Kathleen Wyatt successfully claimed £500,000 from her ex-husband’s wealth accumulated after the divorce. This illustrates why financial remedy claims must be addressed separately and ideally before applying for a Final Order.

Why clarity matters

The rise of online applications and self-managed divorces means more people are navigating the process without professional guidance. Without clear terminology, they risk overlooking critical steps. A simple solution could be to rename the order as a ‘Final Divorce Order’ or ‘Final Civil Partnership Dissolution Order’ and add a suffix confirming whether financial claims have been resolved.

Reverting to old-fashioned legal jargon isn’t the answer, but refining the language is essential. Clear, unambiguous terms would protect individuals and help professionals reinforce the importance of settling financial matters before the divorce is finalised.