[(Title)] Unhappy wife must stay married, UK court rules.

An English woman who wants to divorce her husband on the grounds she is unhappy has lost her Supreme Court appeal.

Tini Owens, 68, from Worcestershire, wanted the court to grant her a divorce from her husband of 40 years Hugh, who is refusing the split.

来自伍斯特郡的68岁的蒂尼·欧文斯恳请法院允许她与结婚40年的丈夫离婚，后者拒绝离婚。

The Supreme Court unanimously rejected the appeal, meaning she must remain married until 2020.

最高法院一致拒绝了她的上诉，这意味着她在2020年之前都不能离婚。

Mrs Owens' solicitor said she was "devastated" by the decision and "cannot move forward with her life".

欧文斯夫人说：“这个结果让她崩溃”，生活无法继续。”

Under the current law in England and Wales, unless people can prove their marriage has broken down due to adultery, unreasonable behaviour or desertion, the only way to obtain a divorce without a spouse's consent is to live apart for five years.

根据英格兰和威尔士的现行法律，除非可以证明自己的婚姻是因外遇、不理智的行为或被遗弃的因素而破裂，否则，在未经配偶同意的情况下，要想离婚的唯一方法是分居五年。

Following the ruling, the Ministry of Justice said: "The current system of divorce creates unnecessary antagonism in an already difficult situation. We are already looking closely at possible reforms to the system."

公布上述裁决之后，司法部门表示：“目前的离婚制度会对原本已非常糟糕的困境造成更多不必要的对抗情绪。我们已经开始密切抓紧研究如何对该制度进行的改革。”

The couple were married in 1978 and have two adult children.

这对夫妇于1978年结婚，有两个成年子女。

Mrs Owens said she had been contemplating a divorce since 2012, but did not leave the matrimonial home until February 2015. She alleged the marriage had broken down irretrievably and Mr Owens had behaved in such a way that she could not reasonably be expected to live with him.

欧文斯女士说，她自2012年起就一直在考虑离婚，但直到2015年2月才离开婚姻住所。她声称自己的婚姻无可挽回，欧文斯先生的行为方式使她无法与他生活在一起。

Mr Owens, 80, has refused to agree to a divorce and denied Mrs Owens' allegations about his behaviour. He said if their marriage had irretrievably broken down it was because she'd had an affair, or because she was "bored".

但80岁的欧文斯拒绝离婚，并否认欧文斯夫人有关他行为的指控。他说，如果他们的婚姻不可挽回地破裂是因为她有外遇，或者因为她“腻了”。

Supreme Court justices analysed rival legal arguments, which revolved around concepts of "unreasonable" behaviour and "fault", at a hearing in May and delivered a ruling on Wednesday.

最高法院大法官在5月的一次听证会上分析了竞争对手的法律论据，并于周三作出裁决。会上的论点围绕着“不理智行为”和“过错”的概念。

A statement made by Mr Owens' solicitors said he should not be "unfairly criticised for attempting to save his marriage".

欧文斯律师发表的一份声明说，他"不应因试图挽救自己的婚姻而受到不公正的批评"。

The case has sparked a debate about whether divorce laws in England and Wales need to change. Caroline Elliott, a specialist lawyer, said: "England and Wales currently lag far behind other countries with their divorce laws and there is a strong mood for reform, which includes the introduction of 'no-fault' divorces."

该案引发了一场辩论，讨论英格兰和威尔士是否需要修改离婚法。一位专业律师表示：“英格兰和威尔士目前在离婚法方面远远落后于其他国家，并且有一种强烈的改革心态，其中包括引入‘无过错’离婚。”

Nigel Dyer QC, who led Mr Owens' legal team, disagreed and raised concerns about the introduction of divorce on "demand".

奈杰尔·迪耶尔·QC领导欧文斯先生的法律小组，对"需求"提出离婚表示不同意，并提出了关切。

Another said Parliament had "decreed" that being in a "wretchedly unhappy marriage" was not a ground for divorce.

一位议员说，国会颁布法令，认定“婚姻不幸福”不是离婚的理由。