MARRIAGE AS A STATUS/CONTRACT Flashcards
What is meant by marriage as a status?
The law regards status as meaning: relationship that has a set of legal consequences flowing from it automatically, regardless of the intentions of the parties
Case that defines status?
AMPTHILL PEERAGE CASE 1977
Definition of status from AMPTHILL PEERAGE CASE 1977
‘The condition of belonging to a class in society to which the law prescribes peculiar rights and duties, capacities and incapacities’
What does a status view of marriage suggest?
That the intention of the parties is not important, they are subject to the specific laws of marriage regardless
What would a contract view of marriage mean?
That the legal consequences would only stem for the clauses defined in the contract that directly reflect the intentions of the parties
What is the view taken by English law?
A mixture of the status and contract
Which case did HALE describe the law’s view of marriage as both status and contract?
RADMACHER v GRANTIANO 2010
What was said in RADMACHER v GRANTIANO about the contract view of marriage?
‘Marriage is, of course, a contract in the sense that each party must agree to enter into it, and once entered, both are bound by its legal consequences’
What 2 points are made about marriage as a status in RADMACHER v GRANTIANO 2010?
1) Parties aren’t entirely free to decide legal com sequences for themselves, must contact into package the law of the land lays down
2) Their marriage also has legal consequences for other people and state
An academic who argued for the status view of marriage?
ROB GEORGE 2012
What is the argument of Rob George 2012?
- > That marriage is like joining a club
- > Meet entry requirements and you can join, but can’t unilaterally change rules of the club
- > You can chose whether or not to be a member, and campaign to change the rules whether you are a member or not
- > Can’t be a member and refuse to follow current club rules
What was the argument of DEWAR & PARKER?
That marriage should be a contractually acquired status
What did Dewar & Parker mean by a ‘contractually acquired status’?
Some legal consequences should flow automatically from marriage, but others should stem from individual agreement between parties
Is there any evidence that the law accepts the view of contractually acquired marriage status?
YES
- > Increasing encouraging of ADR, avoiding the courts
- > In RADMACHER v GRANTIANO 2010, SC gave legal weight to prenups, suggesting willingness to allow legal consequences to be decided on an individual basis
What was the reaction to legal recognition of prenups?
Hysterical. ‘Death knell of marriage’, by allowing couples to define marriage themselves it would lose all meaning