Chapter 2 Formation of Adult Partnerships Flashcards
Classic definition of marriage - “the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others”
Hyde v Hyde and Woodmansee
The marriage was void because the parties did not have capacity to marry - bride underwent gender reassignment surgery and the judge decided that a persons gender is determined at birth and cannot be altered by surgical intervention
Corbett v Corbett (1970)
Modern definition of marriage - “a contract for which the parties elect but which is regulated by the state, both in its formation and in its termination by divorce because it affects the status upon which depend a variety of entitlements, benefits and obligations”
Bellinger v Bellinger (2003)
ECtHR held that the UK was in breach of Arts 8 and 12 ECHR in refusing to allow a transgendered person to change her birth certificate following gender reassignment surgery to enable her to live as a woman.
Goodwin v UK (2002)
The applicant had undergone male to female gender reassignment and wanted a new birth certificate to reflect the change. This was refused and as a result the applicant had experienced problems in obtaining employment and in securing a student loan
I v UK (2002)
The ECtHR refused to uphold the right of transgendered individuals to marry a person of their own birth gender. Stating “there was no obligation of the state to change their birth certificates to reflect their new identities”.
Rees v UK (1987) and Cossey v UK (1991)
Husband living in Netherlands since 1979, the links with his friends in England, his British nationality and his limited assimilation into Dutch Society showed that he had not abandoned his domicile of choice and was still domiciled in England
Irvin v Irvin
Deceased was a Cypriot and had lived in England for 43 years. COA asked whether the deceased had formed necessary intention to remain permanently or indefinitely. Domicile of origin remains in place unless/until there was clear, cogent and compelling evidence of sufficient intention to acquire a new domicile of choice – the deceased retained his domicile of origin.
Cyganik v Agulian (2006)
The spouses were Uncle and Niece. This would be void under English law but was permitted under the law of the parties domicile. The marriage was recognised as valid. The judge found that the test to be applied is “whether the marriage is so offensive to the conscience of the English court that it should refuse to recognise and give effect to the proper foreign law”.
Cheni v Cheni (1962)
Definition of polygamous marriage – “A marriage in which one of the parties is allowed by the law of their domicile to take another spouse.”
Hussein v Hussein (1982)
An English Court had to consider the validity of a potentially polygamous marriage, although its prime concern was the age of the wife. The parties married in Nigeria in accordance with Muslim Law when the wife was only 13 years old. The marriage was nevertheless recognised as valid as it was permitted by the law of the pre-marriage domicile of the parties.
Mohammed v Knott (1969)
