As the case law explains, incompatibility by itself is not recognized as a ground of divorce. Nor can incompatibility be used as a pretext for cruelty. The onus on a preponderance of probabilities rests with the party claiming that the other party inflicted mental cruelty, whether intentional or not. (See: MacDonald v. Wilton, The 2010 Annotated Divorce Act, s. 8 Review)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.