Wrong couple divorced after computer error by law firm Vardag's

Some things should require human control and agency involved at every step from conception to completion. Even if the software merely enabled such a mistake to be made, that means the software is interacting with a system that is not equipped to handle failure modes gracefully. It's half baked, and as seen, the system can have profound and lasting impact on people's lives. If the stakes are high, the diligence and care have to be escalated as well.

Marriage, divorce, bankruptcy, and other situations should be human only until we are entirely certain that programmatic access is not going to result in hiccups and disruptions.

Edit: Thinking through my own analogy about the telegraph more, I suppose that if it had happened over telegraph and had been phrased as "telegraph error" that could mean either the telegraph operator or the telegraph itself were to blame. So maybe the "computer operator" being to blame makes it a more reasonable description that I first thought. Still feels like a suboptimal description though since there is so much room for ambiguity. Though, a "postal" error still doesn't make much sense, so I suppose one would need to gather data about whether the "computer" is thought of more like the "telegraph" or the "post" to most people.

> In his summary, Judge McFarlane noted that "with its now customary speed", the system granted the order just 21 minutes later.

In the equivalent pen and paper situation, the solicitor would presumably have a significantly longer time period to discover and correct their error.

On the other hand, they really should have been familiar with the process.

I divorced through this process.

There are multiple steps. You have to apply, papers have to be served, then (after a five month cooling off period) you get a preliminary order (what used to be called a decree nisi) then after another few weeks you have to apply to a final order (what used to be called a decree absolute). I stayed up so I could apply for the final order at midnight. It was done by the time I woke up late the following morning.

Financial and child arrangements are separate cases and you only need to go to court over those if there are disputes over those.

In this case they had gone through the whole process when one party's lawyer's accidentally applied for the last step - the final order. That party had authorised their lawyer to do it, so its fair enough that they are being held to what their lawyer did on their behalf. . IMO people should not even use lawyers for the divorce. They might be needed for the (separate) child arrangements and finance disputes, if (and only if) those are disputed. For the divorce itself. Just do it online.

— Mitch Ratcliffe

No, they would call it a "clerical error" and reverse the ruling.

Here's an example of such a law in the US:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_60

In the pen and paper times you could call it a "form design error" if the tick boxes were, for example, confusingly named "Yes, I don't want to divorce" and "no, I do" and someone misunderstood and ticked the wrong one

But in terms of law, her lawyers acting on her authority requested the divorce, the other party agreed and the divorce was finalised. The due process was followed.

What should happen next is that the woman sues her lawyers for negligence, demanding compensation to the tune of the amount that she failed to negotiate in the divorce.

If Mrs lost money due to the mistake, her recourse is to sue her incompetent lawyer.

> Mr Williams' legal representatives argued a final order of divorce is a "once-and-for-all" order, which cannot be set aside by the consent of the parties and may only be rescinded by the court if found to be either void or voidable.

It isn't like two other random people that didn't want to be were accidentally divorced.

if you never see finality you can worry that some entity will come and change the assumptions at any time.

say that you made a transaction based ona valuation. 15 years later the IRS comes and rewrites that valuation and because this is so late you have absolutely no recourse.

If you accidentally send nudes to your parents, that's actually an "SMS error".

If you drive your car off of a cliff, that's a "pavement error".

If you intended to go to bed early, but actually stay up late playing video games/watching TV/reading/whatever, then that is a "clock error".