Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articlesrss feeds
Obligations and responsibilities – the mosquito in the bedroom
Stephen Wildblood KC, 3PB BarristersLuke Nelson, 3PB BarristersWhatever happened to ‘obligations and responsibilities’ in s 25(2) MCA 1973?  Why is it that all of the other words in...
A rare order for a child in utero
Mary Welstead, CAP Fellow Harvard Law School; Visiting Professor in Family law University of BuckinghamIn 2023, Kettering NHS Trust applied for an anticipatory declaration for a child...
Stranded spouses: an overview
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4PB, author of A Practical Guide to Stranded Spouses in Family Law ProceedingsThis article provides an overview of the issues that often arise in cases...
Now is the time to reassess presumption f parental involvement in cases involving domestic abuse
Lea Levine, Paralegal at Stewarts and former independent domestic violence advisorIn this article, paralegal and former independent domestic violence advisor (“IDVA”) Lea Levine...
Hadkinson orders – applicability in financial remedy proceedings
Hassan Sarwar, Cornwall Street BarristersHassan Sarwar considers the development and usage of Hadkinson Orders in financial remedy proceedings.  The article provides a helpful overview of a...
View all articles
Authors

Bellinger v Bellinger - Not quite between the ears and between the legs - Transsexualism and marriage in the Lords [2003] CFLQ 295

Sep 29, 2018, 17:57 PM
Title : Bellinger v Bellinger - Not quite between the ears and between the legs - Transsexualism and marriage in the Lords [2003] CFLQ 295
Slug : bellinger-v-bellinger-not-quite-between-the-ears-and-between-the-legs-transsexualism-and-marriage-in-the-lords-2003-cflq-295
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Sep 23, 2011, 04:33 AM
Article ID : 96125

The House of Lords has held that a 'marriage' between a man and a male-to-female transsexual person is not valid, while declaring that position incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. This article argues that the decision was reached via two inconsistent and unconvincing strands of reasoning, and that there was a failure to reflect the tenor and spirit of the European Court of Human Rights' decision in Goodwin v United Kingdom.

Categories :
  • Articles
  • CFLQ
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from