The co-defendant is a person named by the plaintiff in a civil suit, often related to divorce cases where adultery is alleged. In England, the Matrimonial Causes Act 1857 required the person with whom adultery was committed to be named, leading to shaming and contested divorces. In the US, it is not necessary to name a defendant when claiming adultery. UK law changed in the 21st century to allow charges of adultery without naming a co-defendant, reducing contested divorces.
A defendant is one of two or more people named by the plaintiff in a civil suit. While many lawsuits mention co-defendants, the term is most often thought of in relation to those divorce cases where adultery on the part of the defendant is alleged. In many of these cases, the person with whom the defendant was allegedly accused of committing adultery was listed as related. More common in England than in the United States, the practice has fallen out of favor and is now discouraged.
England’s Matrimonial Causes Act 1857 codified the concept of co-respondent and required that in divorce cases relating to adultery, the person with whom it was committed be named. The co-defendant has become a co-defendant and, if the divorce has been granted, is usually required to pay the costs of the divorce and sometimes large damages to the plaintiff. The effect of this system has been to shame and humiliate defendants and co-defendants, and also to jeopardize the marriages of co-defendants. It also led to more contested divorces, because co-respondents sometimes insisted on trying to restore their reputations by trying divorce cases that would otherwise have gone uncontested.
To be named jointly responsible in a divorce case was a social disaster, especially if married. The popular perception was of a somewhat libertine man, willing to risk with the reputation of others. Often dressed up, these weren’t stolid married types, at least not while philandering! In fact, the term “co-respondent shoes” became a humorous reference to the kind of shoes such men would stereotypically wear, easily memorable with pattern or color, especially when left outside a hotel room door to shine. while the couple remained behind the door.
In the United States, the rules governing marriage and divorce are set by each of the states, and in most states it is not necessary to charge adultery or name a defendant when it is claimed. In the UK, by contrast, the only ground for divorce is ‘irreparable breakdown’, which is supported in a divorce petition by presentation and proof of facts, of which adultery is one of only five permitted. Furthermore, claiming adultery allows for a speeded-up divorce process, which may explain why it is claimed in four out of five divorce petitions in the UK.
As the 20th century drew to a close, more courts in the UK allowed adultery charges without naming names; this relaxation of standards, however, was not universal. In the early part of the 21st century, as part of a general reform of marriage and divorce laws, UK law changed to allow charges of adultery without the requirement to name a co-defendant, although it does not outlaw practice . This was seen by most as a positive step because it shifted the focus of divorce proceedings away from ascertaining fault. It also reduced the number of contested divorces because co-defendants no longer had to try to restore their own reputations.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
