Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
NULLITY OF MARRIAGE, Mahon v Mahon, Ng Wee Whye v Wong Sook Heng [1978] 1…
NULLITY OF MARRIAGE
Void Marriages
-
-
Suits for annulling void marriages can be instituted not only by parties to the marriage BUT by persons having a financial interest in the matter, and even after both parties are dead.
-
-
Suits for annulling void marriages can be instituted not only by parties to the marriage BUT by persons having a financial interest in the matter, and even after both
parties are dead
Voidable Marriage
-
A voidable marriage is a valid marriage, UNLESS the court declares otherwise
-
Unless a decree is obtained, the marriage remains in force.
-
-
Jurisdiction of Court
Section 67, LRA 1976
-
-
(b) where the marriage between the parties was contracted under a law providing that, or in contemplation of which, marriage is monogamous; and
(c) where both the parties to the marriage reside in Malaysia at the time of the commencement of the proceedings
-
Mahon v Mahon
The parties were domiciled in Ireland. Immediately after the marriage in Ireland, the parties came to Malaya and had made their matrimonial home in the Federation for 15 years. Later, the wife petitioned for divorce. The HC dismissed the petition on the ground that it had no jurisdiction under s.49(1) (b) of the Divorce Ordinance 1952.
She appealed vs the decision. At the Federal Court, the judge observed that the learned trial court overlooked the fact that immediately after the
marriage, the parties had left for Malaya and for the past 15 years, they had matrimonial home in Federation
Held: the wife had been ordinarily resident in the Federation and thus, the court has jurisdiction to entertain the application
-
Corbett v Corbett
4.
-
Facts: the parties had undergone a marriage ceremony. At that time, the P had knowledge that the respondent had been registered as a male at birth. Thus, the P also knew that the R had 3 years earlier undergone a gender reassignment encompassing the removal of the testicles and most of the scrotum as well as the formation of an artificial vagina. The R had since then lived as a woman
-
L v L
1.
Inability to consummate, may be due to physiological/ psychological causes.
Facts: After 3 years of marriage, the evidence showed that the W was still a virgin. The H could consummate the marriage with another woman, but was unable to consummate with her
-
-
PP v Rajappan
1.
The court held that it had no jurisdiction to decide on the validity of the 2nd marriage because the act of bigamy was committed outside M'sia. After this case,
amendments were made to some provisions under the LRA 1976 and also the Penal Code
After amendment: the court can decide on the validity of the 2nd marriage/ the act of bigamy committed outside
Malaysia
-
-
Baxter v Baxter
1.
Principle: Although the H used contraceptive sheath, the marriage was considered to have been consummated.
Facts: The W did not allow the H to have sexual intercourse with her unless he uses contraceptive sheath.
Hirani v Hirani
3
-
Facts: The P, a 19 year old Hindu girl was asked by her parents to break off a r/ship with a Muslim boy. The parents told the P to get married with someone who they liked. The court granted a decree to the P.
-
Rv R
1.
The test of consummation is penetration, BUT a brief period of penetration w/out emission inside or outside might in particular circumstances, not amount to ordinary & complete intercourse
Horton v Horton
2.
"My Lord, I don't think it desirable to attempt any
definition of the phrase 'wilful refusal to consummate the marriage'. The words connote i think, a settled and definite decision come without just excuse, and in determining whether there has been such refusal, the judge should have regard to the whole history of marriage
Rathee v Shanmugam
2.
Principle: Where the parties have agreed that a civil marriage will be followed by a religious ceremony, it is a just excuse for refusing to consummate the marriage if one party refuses to undergo a religious ceremony
-
-