Read more articles in: Blog, News, Stuart Daniel

High court upholds divorces approved by computer error, raising concerns about technology in legal systems

A recent High Court ruling has raised important questions about the use of technology in legal systems.

It was discovered that 79 divorces had been mistakenly approved due to a computer glitch.

These applications were submitted one day earlier than legally allowed, highlighting concerns about the reliability of automated systems in legal processes.

Our Head of Family, Stuart Daniel, has reviewed what this may mean for separating couples.

The case unfolds

The issue began when a validation error in an online system, active since April 2022, allowed divorce applications to be submitted prematurely.

The system failed to detect that the applications were filed exactly a year after the marriage, while the law requires a minimum of one year and one day before a divorce can be filed.

The mistake was discovered in November 2022 when a judge flagged an early submission. The system was promptly fixed, but the problem continued.

In April 2024, another early submission was noticed, and an investigation found 96 such cases. Of these, 79 had already received final divorce orders.

While cases without final orders were halted, those that had already been finalised remained in question.

Lawyers requested the court to declare these divorces “voidable,” allowing them to remain valid.

The court also heard that some individuals had already remarried or were planning to do so, causing additional distress.

Despite the error, the High Court ruled that the divorces would remain legally valid.

The growing role of technology in legal systems

Stuart said: “This case highlights the increasing reliance on technology in the legal system.

“Over recent years, the shift to online systems has aimed to make legal processes more efficient and accessible, with the goal of reducing administrative burdens and speeding up case resolutions.

“Automation in processes like divorce filings was meant to streamline legal proceedings, but this case demonstrates that technology can sometimes fail in significant ways.”

While digital tools have certainly improved accessibility, they also introduce risks. The failure of an automated system to catch a simple error had profound consequences for individuals caught in the system.

This raises important questions about how much trust should be placed in technology when the stakes are so high in legal matters.

Another case of technology-fuelled legal errors

In another example, solicitors at a leading London law firm, Vardags, mistakenly submitted a final divorce order using an online portal.

The solicitors intended to apply for a divorce for another client but accidentally selected the wrong case file. In just 21 minutes, the system granted the final divorce order.

Despite an appeal, the High Court upheld the decision, citing the importance of maintaining legal certainty and finality in divorce cases.

“This ruling further highlights the potential for automated systems to cause errors, yet the court chose to prioritise the finality of legal decisions over correcting the mistake,” added Stuart.

Accountability in legal technology failures

Both cases raise the critical question of accountability when technology fails in legal processes.

Errors in these systems often result from human actions, such as coding mistakes or lack of oversight.

In the case of the early-approved divorces, the error was purely technical and not the fault of the individuals involved.

However, it is difficult to hold software engineers accountable for a system malfunction.

In the Vardags case, the error was caused by human negligence, as the solicitors submitted the wrong final order.

Still, there is concern that automated systems, which lack sufficient oversight, increase the likelihood of such mistakes.

Stuart said that this brings into question how legal systems should balance the benefits of technology with the need for human accountability, particularly when the consequences of errors are so significant.

The human element in legal processes

Divorce proceedings are already complex and emotionally taxing, and when technology fails, vulnerable individuals may find it difficult to remedy the situation.

The finality of legal decisions, particularly in divorce cases, is crucial, as personal and financial matters are at stake.

Critics argue that relying on automated systems without proper human review can undermine fairness, especially for those who are already struggling to navigate the legal process.

Reopening cases to fix technology errors could extend legal battles and cause further distress to individuals who have already moved on with their lives.

The cases discussed illustrate the tension between maintaining legal finality and correcting mistakes that may result in miscarriages of justice.

In conclusion, these incidents highlight the importance of human oversight in legal processes, even as technology continues to play a larger role.

“While technology can improve efficiency, it cannot replace the need for careful review, especially when the consequences for individuals are so significant,” added Stuart.

Legal systems must ensure that technology is used responsibly, and that human judgment remains a key part of the process.

If you need guidance or support navigating a divorce or separation, contact our team for support.

Stuart Daniel

Director – Head of Family Department

I qualified as a Solicitor in 2006 and now specialise in divorce, financial settlements, childcare arrangements and Pre Nuptial Agreements. I have many years’ experience as a private family lawyer having worked with two other local firms before returning to Mander Hadley, where I first undertook work experience during my university studies.