A woman, who was blamed by French courts for her divorce because she no longer had sex with her husband, has won an appeal in Europe’s top human rights court, the court said on Thursday, reigniting a debate in France over women’s rights.
…
[Lawyer, Lilia Mhissen] “This decision marks the abolition of the marital duty and the archaic, canonical vision of the family,” she said in a statement. “Courts will finally stop interpreting French law through the lens of canon law and imposing on women the obligation to have sexual relations within marriage.”
I’m not a lawyer (nor married), so my understanding is limited, but if both spouses agree to divorce (with or without agreeing on the exact conditions e.g. childcare), then that would constitute a no fault divorce. It seems to get messier if one spouse doesn’t want to consent to the divorce, then the notion of fault starts appearing. And that’s where my incomplete knowledge stops, both on the letter of the law and how it is applied in practice. The judge seems to have a lot of latitude as to whether the fault, if any, leads to consequences (financial reparations are a possibility).