Transgender Flashcards

Question

White v White

Answer 1

High Court case - Two days later from Grimes, opposition conclusion, consummation still occurred, however, if you keep doing it, then it is grounds for divorce as cruelty to the wife.

Answer 2

High court case so no authoritative ruling, approved the White v White case. H pulled out before ejaculation, though not void because they consummated, but granted divorce because of cruelty.

Answer 3

HL allowed condoms underlining that procreation need not be intended, this point was driven home in Clarke v Clarke. despite wife conceiving a child by a rogue, persistent sperm, the marriage was nevertheless unconsummated for want of actual intercourse.

Answer 4

Achieved erection, so penetrated wife but unable to ejaculate. Wife wanted nullity because he wouldn’t make her pregnant. Held: ejaculation isn’t a valid requirement for consummation following Baxter.

Answer 5

W was able to penetrate wife but the erection collapsed every time. Held: did not count as consummation, no need for orgasm there has to have intercourse for a reasonable amount of time and on the facts of the case, this was not so. Brandon J – “penetration, maintained for so short a time, resulting in no emission either inside the wide or outside her, cannot without violation of language be described as ordinary and complete intercourse”.

Answer 6

No need for consummation in civil partnerships. No one knows if a transgender needs to consummate the marriage. Baxter might still be the case, if so transgender will never be able to consummate for following reasons above, this seems inhumane and unlikely.

Answer 7

Under Marriage Act 1949 section 1(2) a married between a person mentioned in a list in part 2 of schedule 1 shall be void. 1(3) any marriage under section 1(2) shall not be void if the parties have reached 21 years at time of marriage and the younger party has not been a child of the family.

Answer 8

Matrimonial act 1973 Section 12. 1) the parties with the prohibited degrees of relationship 2) either party is under 16 3) the parties have intermarried in disregard of certain requirements as to the formation of marriage. 4) At time of marriage either party was already lawfully married or a civil partner 5) polygamous marriage entered into outside England, that either party was at the time of the marriage domiciled in England.

Answer 9

CPA, Schedule 1, section 2(2)

Answer 10

Marriage between adoptive parent and child is absolutely barred, even though sexual activity between them, once both are adult is permitted.

Answer 11

Both divorced, farther and daughter in law wanted to marry but were barred until both ex spouses died or unless they invoked an expensive procedure with no precedent to obtain a personal Act of Parliament permitting the marriage. ECHR Held: the restrictions were a breach under article 12. Moreover, they did not like the law because the bar on marriage does not prevent the relationships occurring. There is no incest or criminal law for parents in law and children in law. And unimpressed that the private Act of Parliament has enabled some parties to marry. The in-law restriction was repealed from Schedule 1. There is now no age limit either. You can now marry your spouces parent. Or your childs ex wife.

Answer 12

When reunited with birth family, he fell in love with his birth sister and had children, they married. Held: unlawful under law, he challenged this arguing that he had not grown up together. Held: doesn’t matter, still incest. Family even if you never live together

Answer 13

Marriage Act 1949 Section 2

Answer 14

wife below the age of 16 was valid because it was marriage age in that country was below 16.

Answer 15

No crime was committed, where a man has sex with a girl under 16 if that girl is his wife.

Answer 16

Whosoever, being married, shall marry any other person during the life of the former husband or wife, whether the second marriage shall have taken place in England or Ireland or elsewhere, shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof

Answer 17

Involved English woman who married an indian man in india, she later discovered that he was already married, she petitioned and was successful. Held: as she was a UK citizen it was not a valid marriage.

Answer 18

Unless strong reason to contray, UK doesn’t have a massive problem to polymamous marriages as long as it doesn’t involve UK citizens.

Answer 19

Married husband in Bangladesh, they were both Bangladesh citizens. Husband then married a second time. Family then moved to UK, until husband’s death, the wife sought a widows pension. Held: couldn’t receive this pension because there was another recognised wife and against public policy to hand out two widow pensions.

Answer 20

Sch 4, para 4, Marriage act 2013

Answer 21

CPA 2004 section 50

Answer 22

Wife had a physical disability that her vagina “in the form of a coldersack”, no uterus so husband was unable to penetrate. Held: Incapacity must be permanent and unfixable, as this was not the case, as she was willing to get surgery, here the husband did not get his nullity. Whether any sexual satisfaction is obtained is irrelevant to the legal perfection of intercourse

Answer 23

Collapsing erection case straight away when got erection. Held unable to consummate, ejaculation not required but erection of some endurance is.

Answer 24

Spouse can have an “invincible impugnance” when engaging with sexual intercourse. Held: unable to consummate with husband. It must "paralyse her will power to carry out what she had promised" It cannot be due to her unwillingness. HOL

Answer 25

Wife argued G v G applied to her, wife had psychological condition. Courts decided that her not wanting to have sex with husband was a preference rather than a psychological condition. This amounted to wilful refusal and a wife cannot rely on her own willful refusal, need medical evidence. For invincible impugnance there must be some sexual or physical aversion.

Answer 26

Intersex person, person born with ambiguous genitals. Whatever decision made for intersex person, boy or girl, you can still consummate the marriage. Following Ormrod in Corbet - where genetialia is ambiguous at birth and sex operation fixes the problem, the law will declare that to be the gender, even if the gonods and chromosomes are different. Ormrod said: "the greater weight would probably be given to the genital criteria than to the other two. "

Answer 27

Capacity to understand that you are getting married and there is knowledge of the rights and duties that marriage has. E fails capacity case.

Answer 28

Woman suffers from being deaf, she has behavioral problems, she was in an arranged marriage which meant she would have to move to Pakistan. Local services tried to stop this marriage by arguing that she lacked the capacity to understand marriage and the rights and obligations on the parties. However, they found that she wouldn’t understand this specific marriage, that she would have to move to Pakistan. Held: prohibiting her leaving the country, held, she had the capacity but she was venerable. Inherent jurisdiction of the court was found here.

Answer 29

– C a man with autism and learning difficulties, parents arranged for him to marry a Bangladesh woman, the marriage took place over the phone. Held: valid marriage, marriage valid in Bangladesh because they had no capacity law, had marriage taken place in UK, there would be no marriage because he lacked capacity. Held: void marriage. There was an appeal which held that the marriage was a voidable marriage, courts should have said on public policy grounds they would override this voidable marriage statement and treat it as void.

Answer 30

Wilful refusal to consummate definition - “a settled and definite decision come to without just excuse” in light of the context of the marriage. Here consummation was delayed by war and unsuccessful attempt was made. Court acknowledged that in the “false start” cases, one or both parties would frequently be reluctant and hesitant to try again, and as wife was anxious to resolve the problem, she could not be said to be wilfully refusing.

Answer 31

H and W had a sexual relationship until H was sent to prison. They married while he was in prison, but he refused to consummate the marriage at the time and later said he did not want to live with W even after he was released. W's petition for a decree of nullity was allowed: H's refusal to consummate the marriage in prison was not a "wilful refusal", but his clear determination never to do so was sufficient. Sex before marriage does not count

Answer 32

H and W married, found W was physically unable to consummate the marriage. W underwent surgery and they tried again, but were prevented by W's emotional state. H then declined to try further and W petitioned for annulment on the grounds of H's wilful refusal. The judge dismissed the petition and W's appeal also failed: H's refusal was the result of his loss of sexual ardour rather than a deliberate decision. Natural loss of ardour should not be equated with wilful refusual

Answer 33

s12(a) incapcity must be incurable and permanent. It will be incurable if medical tretment would be dangerous. refusal to undergo reasonable treatment will be construed as a reasonable refusal.

Answer 34

A petition will not be granted if the respondent can show that there was a just excuse for not consummation. Couple went through civil ceremony. Husband refused to make necessary arrangements for religious ceremony. Held: willful refusal now includes refusual for sexual intercourse but also refusal to do anything to allow sexual intercourse in eyes of faith.

Answer 35

husband leaves to go to America, wife is offended that he left her for 2 years in a semi-married state so she refuses to go through the religious ceremony. He successfully gains a decree of nullity. She refuses a religious ceremony which will allow sexual intercourse acceptable in the eyes of their faith.

Answer 36

spoke of the "grey area" between arranged and forced marriages.

Answer 37

the objective test the man was falsely alleged to be the father of a young girl’s child, he was told by his senior officers and lawyers that his only escape from prosecution and imprisonment for under age sex was to marry the girl. Scarman set out a 3 stage test in declaring the marriage void: 1) The fear of sufficient degree to vitiate consent was present 2) The fear was reasonably entertained 3) If the fear was reasonably entertained, it will not vitiate consent, unless It arises from some external circumstance for which the petitioner is not himself responsible.

Answer 38

Objective test was elaborated. Simon P said that the test of duress was whether there was a "genuine and reasonably held fear caused by threat of immediate danger… to life, limb or liberty, so that the constraint destroys the reality of consent to ordinary wedlock". Polish woman married as a mechanism to escape Poland, she did this because Poland threatened her. She then wanted to escape the marriage for duress. Held: “a genuine and reasonably held fear of immediate danger to life, limb or liberty”. Physical threat or threat to liberty, this test was satisfied so she got an annulment. Judge Simon thought that the test must be that marriage was conducted by a "genuine and reasonably held fear caused by threat of immediate danger to life life, limb and liberty".

Answer 39

CA approved the Szechter v Szechter test. 17 year old woman had been forced by parents into arranged marriage to a man she had never met. The Szechter test made it particualy difficult for victims of forced marriages to obtain a decree on this ground.

Answer 40

``` Objective test (CA endorses Szechter test). Here it was the Husband who gave into family pressure. Threatened that If he did not marry, he would lose his job and have no income. Held: because no threat to life, limb or liberty held it was no duress. ``` Ormrod said: "it would be a most serious thing for this court to introduce any less rigorous burden of proof in these matters than that which the court decided was right in the case of Singh v Singh.

Answer 41

Young woman was threatened with eviction from the family home should she not submit to an arranged marriage. Ormrod had been involved in the objective test but now developed the subjective test, less harsh Held: gave her the decree of nullity, almost exactly the case of Singh v Singh, Ormrod: "the crucial question in these cases is whether the threats, pressure, or whatever it is, is such as to destroy the reality of consent and overbears the will of the individual". the test is subjective, whether the particular petitioners will had been overborne, not of reasonable person to find lack of consent

Answer 42

Obiter, the consent required for marriage need not be enthusiastic consent: reluctant consent is enough as long as it is genuine. Age and cultural background will be taken into account when discussing duress.

Answer 43

facts of case would readily satisfy the objective test. British Pakistani family took their daughter to Pakistani for a relative’s funeral. During the visit, the parents arranged a marriage which the daughter was forced to go through with under threat of violence in circumstances where she was unable to escape. Held void for want of consent. Decree of nullity available because no genuine consent.x Although in voidable cases, these are heard in open courts!!! but where the person is reuctant to give evidence in presence of family embers the court will do what it can to protect the petitioner.

Answer 44

The court declared that the Szetcher approach no longer represents the law if it ever did. The prefered approach is the Hirani v Hirani approach: 1) it is not necessary be that the source of fear and the agent of duress will be the other party to the marriage. 2) One has to have regard to the relationship of the parties. As remarked in Re SA( Vulnerable adult with capcity:marriage), the inflience of a parent or a close relative, and where the arguments are basen upon duty, religious beliefsm powerful social or cultural conventions, asserted social, familial or domestic obligation, the influence may be subtle but powerful and persuasive. In such cases, little pressure may suffice. 3) the test is subjective not objective 4) the standard proof is on the balance of proabilities 5) The court should not sterotype. We want to protect vulnerable children, but do not interfere inappropiately.

Answer 45

Two conflicting tests as both are CoA, but likely that Hirani v Hirani is the test as it came later and later cases follow this test. But really need a HOL ruling. CA decision in singh v singh (which adopted the objective test) was not cited in Hirani so unclear. The subjective test is better for forced marriages cases.

Answer 46

Woman taken to India and discovered arranged marriage and told that if she didn’t marry him she would not get her passport back. She argued duress.

Answer 47

It must be a mental disorder within the meaning of the mental health act, section 3. 1) You have a mental disorder, 2) Makes that mental disorder render you unsuitable for marriage. Ormrod J posed the question: 1) is this person capable of living in a married state? 2) Is the person able to carry out the ordinary duties and obligations of marriage. But he did not elaborate. The wife was occasionally violent and hospitalized with neurosis. The court remarked that she might be a person to who it would be difficult to be married and would need an understanding husband. But her mental illness was not so extreme as to make her unfit.

Answer 48

Section 12(1)(g-h)

Answer 49

woman taken to Pakistan by family, she then married a man, she was left in Pakistan, he locked her up, eventually the police became involved. She gets back to England but her three years have expired. Held: there was a time bar so cannot use this but under s55 FLA 1986 she could apply for non marriage. Held: non marriage, this was important because she married and had a child in the meantime so it made the marriage valid and her child legitimate.

Answer 50

Taken to Paistan, everything is taken away from her, forced to marry, held prisoner, she escapes, too late to get home after 3 year period, but court grants decree of nullity, using its “Inherent jurisdiction”

Answer 51

– Woman went to Bangladesh, she was required to marry, she lived with him as prisoner, she came back to England but passed the three years. Held: Court grants a decree of nullity, using its “inherent jurisdiction”

Answer 52

Marriage is not recognised in country where the marriage is performed, then it is not recognised in England either.

Answer 53

HC case,Woman who was Christian planned to marry an atheist Jew, she wanted a religious marriage and he didn’t, they compromised a south Africa holiday where they had a religious service and then have civil. Minister was aware of this, left out "if couple had any lawful impediments to the marriage, made no reference to husband and wife and being lawfully married". Neither parties, nor celebrant believed that it would be legally binding. Held: non marriage. Bodey emphasised that it should be based on case by case basis. Judge Bodey, said there are 4 things to consider with a problematic marriage: 1) Did the ceremony itself purport to be a lawful marriage. (Clarified in El Gamel v Al Maktoum that he was referring to a lawful marriage under english law) 2) Did it bear all or enough hallmarks of the marriage? 3) Did the 3 key participants (most especially the officiating official) believed, intended and understood that the ceremony as giving rise to the status of a lawful marriage? (2 spouses and person presiding) 4) The reasonable perceptions, understandings and beliefs of the people in attendance. Judge Bodey gave example: if a couple wanted to marry and did a dress rehearsal where vicar was present and used full wording of service and there was music, bridesmaids etc but with it being known that the occasion was not the real thing, this would be a non marriage.

Answer 54

Marriage complied all requirements in Syria, but one requirement was not met: requirement that a Syrian national may not marry a person of any other nationality without permission – this was always automatically given. Both parties intended to marry. Ruled that in Syria because no legal marriage had been effected, they do not have non marriage or void as in english law. Held: the marriage was not so deficient that it could be described in english law as a non marriage as it bore all the hallmarks. Nevertheless, the marriage was void in Syrian law. As they didn’t get the Syrian requirement, it is a void marriage in UK, not a non-marriage so she could seek relief when it went wrong. This led Mottahedan to argue that if an invalid marriage was conducted in a country where the requirements for creating a valid marriage are few, it would be easier for an english court to recognise it as a void rather than non marriage as there are less key formalities to fall foul of.

Answer 55

Wife argued that the most important factor was whether the parties intended to create a valid marriage, if so this would convert non marriage into a void marriage. Egyptian lady claimed she got married to royal family, husband disputed facts. 1) Not authorised building 2) Nothing in writing 3) Told to keep it a secret Thereby even if she believed it to be a marriage, which bodey doubted it was not externally a marriage. Bodey J reaffirmed his conclusion in the earlier case of Hudson v Leigh [2009] that cases had to be decided on their own facts on a case by case basis. = non marriage Bodey: "It is not the law, in my judgment that where no or minimal steps are taking to comply with the marriage act... if the participants hopefully intended or believed, that the ceremony would create one" Therefore, intentions of the parties cannot convert a non marriage into void etc.

Answer 56

In that case, Mr Justice Bodey decided that a family gathering in a flat in London, at which the parties entered into a religious agreement, “never set out to be nor purported to be a ‘bona fide ceremony’ at all, in the sense of complying with the requirements of English law”. He also decided that the parties could not have reasonably thought that any such ceremony satisfied the requirements of English law. Such a case was clearly a non-marriage.

Answer 57

The petitioner and respondent intended that the ceremony would create a valid marriage under English law. The Imam believed he was 'only' performing the religious ceremony. Notwithstanding the above the marriage ceremony was in its character 'of the kind' contemplated by the Marriage Act 1949. It was conducted in an authorised building in the presence of an authorised person. A marriage was therefore created.

Answer 58

Judge Woolf declared 6 signposts for a cohabiting relationships: 1) Whether they are members of the same household 2) Reference to stability 3) Financial support 4) Sexual relationship? 5) Children? 6) Public acknowledgement CASH FS

Answer 59

Parties married in civil ceremy at Moroccan Consulate, it did not comply with english formalities even though both parties and staff believed it did. Relying on El Gamal v Maktoum, the court held that just because the parties believed in the validity of the marriage does not mean that it is valid. 1) Consulate was not registered as approved premises (even though many before them got married here) 2) no notice to marry 3) the notary was not authorised Held: non marriage. R Probert in 'The Evolving Concept of Non-Marriage' - "intention alone is an unsatisfactory criterion by which to assess the validity of a marriage"because "if they have separated, then at least one may wish to deny an intention ever to marry.

Answer 60

The COA approved the suggestion that the parties must have made a “lifetime commitment to permanence”.

Answer 61

Whether a marriage is a non marriage/valid/void depends not on whether the purported marriage bore any of the hallmarks of a valid marriage but also on the extent to which the parties were aware that the ceremony did not comply with the legal formalities. 1) Person who presided did not have requirements 2) Marriage is not registered Held: it is a valid marriage. Although celebrate knew ceremony did not comply with legal requirements, he did not inform the couple of this. It bore all the hallmarks of a valid marriage. 1) authorised building 2) presence of authorised person 3) no lawful impediment The marriage was, therefore, valid as the parties did not 'knowingly and wilfully breach' the requirements of the marriage acts'.

Answer 62

Couples who live apart together, unable to reside permanently together in one location will not be regarded as cohabiting.

Answer 63

- the idea that by living with someone a cohabitating person acquires rights comparable to those who are married - is widely believed but is largely false, as those who go to court to enforce their ‘rights’ have found out:

Answer 64

Not married but lived together for 20 years, had three children. Mr Burns then decides not to be with partner, and as the house is in his sole name, he kicks her out. Court holds that as a cohabiting person, she has no family rights oer the family home.

Answer 65

Since 2014 | Marriage (same sex couples) act 2013.

Answer 66

the Civil partnership was introduced because" we are doing this for reasons and social justice". It is "akin to marriage"

Answer 67

Law Commission stated: A valid marriage - not defective and is binding on the parties, it can only be terminated by death or by a decree of divorce Void marriage - this marriage never came into existence because of a fundamental defect, the marriage is void ab initio, no decree of nullity is necessary. Voidable marriage - valid marriage until it is annulled.

Answer 68

1) To provide certainty of a court order definitively stating the legal position 2) to invoke the court's jurisdiction to make financial orders between the parties.

Answer 69

Purported marriages which depart so far from what constitutes a marriage under English law, normally because no attempt has been made to comply with the required formalities. No legal consequences.

Answer 70

It is compatible with Article 14 HR

Answer 71

1) Preliminary procedures - giving public notice of intention to marry 2) Main procedures 3) Bureaucratic requirements - recording

Answer 72

16 for marriage or civil partner | 21 for marriages between step relations

Answer 73

Some are, their non -observance will render the marriage or CP void, though only if there is a "knowing and wilful disregard" of the facts.

Answer 74

Whether or not a particular ceremony is outside the forms specified by the Marriage Act is a question of degree, and recent cases are slowly defining the uncertain boundaries between marriages that are valid, void or non-existent. As Bodey J (Hudson v Leigh ) has noted, attempts to lay down any definition of ‘non-marriage’ may be problematic; instead: ‘Questionable ceremonies should… be addressed on a case by case basis,

Answer 75

"intention alone is an unsatisfactory criterion by which to assess the validity of a marriage"because "if they have separated, then at least one may wish to deny an intention ever to marry. She argues total non compliance (dukali v lamrani) will result in a non marriage, but provided the parties have given required notice or married in authorised location, their marriage will be valid, notwithstanding innocent breaches of other formal requirements.

Answer 76

Dukali v Lamrani [2012]

Answer 77

a couple married in a Sikh temple in 1956 and had two children, lived as man and wife for nearly 40 years, man paid his tax and national insurance on basis he was married. . However, the ceremony had not taken place in a registered building and had not been registered at the Register Office. Following the husband’s death it was held that the marriage was valid. These authorities show that when a man and a woman have cohabited as man and wife for a significant period there is a strong presumption that they have agreed to do so, in proper form

Answer 78

```

MA v JA and the Attorney General [2012] EWHC Al-Saedy v Musawi [2010] EWHC Burns v Burns [2008] Hudson v Leigh [2009] EWHC El Gamal v El Maktoum [2011] EWHC Dukali v Lamrani [2012] EWHC Asaad v Kurter [2013] EWHC K v A [2014] EWHC

```

Answer 79

If a Marriage is not recognised in country where the marriage is performed, then it is not recognised in England either.

Answer 80

Where a man and a woman consent to marry... "it is immaterial that they do not intend to live together as man and wife"

Answer 81

It cannot. But the court can grant declarations under the inherent jurisdictions that the ceremony created a non-marriage.

Answer 82

It is unclear, in particular whether only serious infections such as HIV are included or all sexually transmitted diseases including minor ones such as chlamydia.

Answer 83

The ground was introduced in the pre-antibiotic age and its retention must be questioned. Hansard Report - Civil Partnership bill debates 2004 (Mrs McGuire) The government's intention in drafting the civil partnership bill was so civil partners would be treated in the same way as spouces. It is not appropriate in the present day circumstances to include that as a ground for nullifying civil partners so it is not. The deliberate passing of a STI might be a factor when providing unreasonable behaviour. "I suggest that were we starting now to create marriage law, it would be highly questionable whether we would include such a provision in that law. It is a provision from the bygone age".

Answer 84

Pre-martial agreements not to have sex have been struck down as void on grounds of public policy, though the courts views seem to depend upon the parties' age or situation. An agreement between an elderly or infirm couple who wish to marry purely for companionship is a different matter.

Answer 85

They will be in the same household if they are tied by their relationship. The tie of that relationship may be made manifest by various elements, not simply their living under the same roof, but the public and private acknowledgement of their mutual society, and the mutual protection and support that binds them together. there is a distinction between "wanting and intending to live in the same household, planning to do so, and actually doing so".

Answer 86

Either party can petition on their own incapacity to consummation. However, a person cannot petition on their own wilful refusal. The fact that the parties may have had successful intercourse before the marriage is irrelevant if the incapacity existed at the time of the marriage; it is not clear how the law would view a case in which (say) the incapacity was the result of a road accident between the church and the honeymoon hotel.

Answer 87

Incapacity concerns physical or psychological inability to consummate the marriage. Wilful refusal occurs if either party, although capable of having intercourse, decides that they do not wish to do so.

Answer 88

this could include where the parties were so drunk that they could not validly consent to the marriage.

Answer 89

Inheritance isn’t mentioned in the civil partnership act. This case set that the Inheritance Act 1975 should be read in such a way compatible with same sex couples.

Answer 90

Mr Ladele was a registrar, his job was to preside over marriage ceremonies… now required to preside over civil partnership ceremonies. Because of his religious beliefs he rejected to do that. He was sacked – claimed unfair dismissal, claimed Art 9 of the ECHR (right to religious belief). CoA said Art 9 is not an absolute right, has to balanced against other rights. Courts protected the right to a civil partnership from being undermined.

Answer 91

Cairns moved in with a friend’s family for 50 years. Over time, the parents and then friend died. Was she able to inherit the house because she was family? She claimed that they were sisters. Held: families are not self-defined, they are defined by law. CoA rejected case. The question is whether the person was a member of the family, not whether he was living as a member of the family.

Answer 92

On the facts the same as in Fitzpatrick – same sex couple, one of them dies, can surviving partner have the tenancy? Was successfully argued that the survivor's rights under article 14 in conjunction with article 8 was violated by denying a same sex partner the security of tenure enjoyed by an opposite sex parter on the tenant's death. The HOL from then on interpreted the Rent Act provision under s3 of the HRA to include same sex couples.

Answer 93

Mr Ladele was a registrar, his job was to preside over marriage ceremonies… now required to preside over civil partnership ceremonies. Because of his religious beliefs he rejected to do that. He was sacked – claimed unfair dismissal, claimed Art 9 of the ECHR (right to religious belief). CoA said Art 9 is not an absolute right, has to balanced against other rights. Courts protected the right to a civil partnership from being undermined.

Answer 94

```

SY v SY W v W G v G Singh v Singh W v W (Nullity: Gender) 2001 Sheffield City Council v E

```

Answer 95

Stubling v Germany | B and L v UK

Answer 96

Kaur v Singh A v J Ford v Ford

Answer 97

P v R (Forced Marriage) Re P SH v NB

Answer 98

Hudson v Leigh (2009) HC Al- Saedy v Mudawi (2010) - look at case by case El Gamal v Al Maktoum (2011) - not authorised building + not registered Dukali v Lamrani (2012) - not authorised building Asaad v Kurter (2013) MA v JA (2012) - authorised building, registrar did not have requirements + marriage not registered but valid K v A - authorised building + authorized person who did not believe civil ceremony

Answer 99

Blood relations

Answer 100

family relations created by marriage.

Answer 101

Preliminary formalities: 1) In non-Anglican marriages, the parties must obtain a superintendent registrar's certificate giving them approval to marry. 1) The parties must give notice Marriage ceremony 1) Must take place in a registered office, religious building (church or mosque) or in approved premises The civil ceremony may then be followed by a religious ceremony. 2) The parties must declare that there are no lawful impediments to the marriage 3) they must exchange vows 4) at least two witnesses much attend.

Answer 102

premises which have been approved by the local authority for the purpose of conducting a civil marriage.

Answer 103

where the ceremony bears no resemblance to the requirements of a valid marriage under english law, regardless of the intentions of the parties

Answer 104

where the ceremony meets some of the requirements of the marriage acts and the parties intended to create a valid marriage.

Answer 105

where there was some compliance with formalities but the parties knowingly and wilfully disregarded the full extent of the formal requirements.

Answer 106

this is a common law presumption. 2 presumptions: 1) arising from cohabitation after a ceremony of marriage, In such cases, everything necessary for the validity of the marriage is presumed in the absence of decisive evidence of the contrary. 2) long cohabitation, where a couple have cohabited for such a length of time and in such circumstances to acquire the reputation of being married, even though no positive evidence of a ceremony

Answer 107

s13(1) is hard to satisfy, wife had physical impediment, preventing consummation. It could have been cured by a common operation but the wife refused and the marriage was never consummated. Husband knew and the couple fostered, husband the sought decree of nullity. s13(1) first limb was satisfied but it could not be shown that there would be any injustice to the wife.

Answer 108

high courts inherent and wardship jurisdictions may be more appropiate because of their flexible jurisdictional rules. They may make a declaration that a forced marriage entered into overseas is not capable of being recognised as a valid marriage in england and wales. The inherent jurisdiction may also prove useful in a case where a victim of a forced marriage is unable to petition for a decree of nullity on the ground of lack of consent due to statute barring it under s13(2) ] SH v NB [2009] EWHC Re P (Forced Marriage) [2010] EWHC B v I

Answer 109

1) annulment 2) inherent jurisdiction or wardship 3) forced marriage protection orders

Answer 110

Dolan confirmed that Chalmers v Johns or G v G should not be read as saying that an exclusion order can only be made where there is violence or a threat of violence. That would be 'to put a gloss on the statute which would be inappropriate'. Chalmers v Johns and G v G reiterated the draconian nature of an occupation order and reaffirmed that such an order should only be justified in exceptional circumstances.

Answer 111

forms basis of consent to marriage "the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others"

Answer 112

In Bellinger v Bellinger, it was held that it should not be an essential prerequisite to have surgury to be recognised as that gender as this would coerced people into major operations. The aim of surgery is to make an individual feel more comfortable.

Answer 113

GRA has recognised that no longer assumed that gender is biological.

Answer 114

parties completely intended marriage, but none of formalities complied with - held non marriage Presumption of marriage did not apply because need long period. KA v JA - no notice, person not authorised, but chairman was there who was authorised. Inam thought he was performing religious marriage only.

Answer 115

Ruth Gaffney-Rhys - but it seems that the most important factor is whether it bore enough of the hallmarks of marriage Dukali v Lamrani - the ceremony purported to be a lawful marriage, the key participants intended and believed the ceremony to create a valid marriage, as did family members in attendance, which meant that three out of the four conditions set out in Hudson v Leigh were satisfied. Held non marriage MA v JA bore far more characteristics of an English marriage ceremony and was consequently considered potentially valid rather than non-existent. This was despite the fact that the Imam who performed the ceremony did not intend or believe that it would give rise to a marriage recognised under English civil law In Hudson v Leigh Bodey J indicated that one of the factors to be considered was whether the key participants (most especially the officiating official) believed and intended the ceremony to create a lawful marriage and yet the Imam’s beliefs were insufficient. The parties themselves did believe that the ceremony would give rise to a marriage recognised under English law, which suggests that their intentions and beliefs were more influential than that of the celebrant. But as the court explained in El Gamal v Al-Maktoum and Dukali v Lamrani intention is insufficient and cannot convert a non-marriage into a valid or void one. However, in Dukali v Lamrani both parties and their families genuinely believed and intended the marriage to be valid, but it was categorised as non-existent In El Gamal v Al-Maktoum it was doubtful whether the father intended to enter a marriage recognised under English law and there was no evidence regarding the beliefs of the celebrant or witness. It is therefore likely that none of the criteria established in Hudson v Leigh was satisfied.

Transgender Flashcards

(141 cards)