6 comments

[ 5.8 ms ] story [ 25.7 ms ] thread
Discussion yesterday:[0](76 points, 25 comments)

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40043949

Better link too.

The Register has such a heavy style that I can't always understand what they're trying to say.

Thanks, this article is incredibly poorly written.

The top comment (by danielvf) in the linked thread explains the whole situation much better.

Who was supposed to get divorced instead of this couple? Like, what was supposed to happen before the error was made?
I assume the couple will be able to sue for malpractice?
It seems weird to say that filing anything incorrectly doesn’t constitute “procedural irregularity”. I don’t know, maybe that’s a specific term of law in this particular jurisdiction, but if that’s the case it doesn’t seem to mean anything close to what the actual words mean.