Naming co respondents

Hi all,
I may be forced to name a co respondent in a case of adultery.

Does a co respondent have to acknowledge receipt of their copy of the petition?

Why are you forced to name the co-respondent? you do not have to name a co-respondent to achieve a divorce by adultery if your partner is willing to admit to it.

It is against 'good protocol' to involve co-respondents these days - though you can do it if you insist.

The co-respondent does have to acknowledge receipt of the petition - but frequently don't. Then you have to spend time and money chasing down and sending baliffs to serve notice and even then if they dont respond it is unlikely that the court will take any serious action against them.

I would think that your efforts are better spent pursuing the claim against your partner.

Thanks for the quick reply, i'm basically trying to make things as easy as possible and my wife who has committed adultery says she will contest/deny it, if i dont name the person she committed adultery with.

I know it is pointless but i may end up doing it just try and make things easier.

I should add the co-respondent will be my own brother, and he knows a petition will duly arrive, therefore i dont anticipate the usual delay of co-respondent not replying/admitting etc.

I feel it is the best way to do it, to stop my wife denying or contesting.

Is it normally not advisable due to the fact co-respondents dont reply and cause delays?
My brother will reply in the time limit and admits adultery with her.

Any views appreciated.

There is a protocol that solicitors abide by that provides guidelines about how they should conduct a case. One aim is to stop them acting in a way that could cause unnecessarily high levels of friction and anger between the parties.

The guideline not to name co-respondents is just that - a guideline - not a firm rule. Its up to you, in your specific case the benefits of naming (proving the adultery) may outweigh the downside (causing resentment).