Latest articles
UK Immigration Rough Sleeper Rule
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsThe UK government has recently introduced a controversial new set of rules that aim to make rough sleeping grounds for refusal or cancellation of a migrant’s...
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
View all articles
Authors

K v K [2016] EWHC 3380 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 19:45 PM
Marriage and divorce – Nullity – Islamic ceremony – Respondent still married at time of marriage ceremony – Whether the petitioner was entitled to a decree of nullity
The court held that the woman was entitled to a decree of nullity.
Slug : k-v-k-2016-ewhc-3380-fam
Meta Title : K v K [2016] EWHC 3380 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Marriage and divorce – Nullity – Islamic ceremony – Respondent still married at time of marriage ceremony – Whether the petitioner was entitled to a decree of nullity
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 28, 2017, 11:24 AM
Article ID : 113902

(Family Division, Francis J, 24 November 2016)

Marriage and divorce – Nullity – Islamic ceremony – Respondent still married at time of marriage ceremony – Whether the petitioner was entitled to a decree of nullity

The court held that the woman was entitled to a decree of nullity.

The petitioner was 61 and had been married in Pakistan but that marriage was terminated by Talaq in 1994. The respondent was married in 1964 and that marriage had not been terminated.

In 1999 the parties took part in a marriage ceremony at a Mosque in 1999. The respondent contended that the petitioner knew he was still married at that point. She denied this.

Thereafter the petitioner was informed that the Talaq in respect of her first marriage had not been registered. She subsequently obtained a decree of Khula in Pakistan. The respondent initiated proceedings for jactitation of his first marriage but abandoned them before their conclusion.

The petitioner claimed that in 2003 the parties entered into an Islamic marriage via telephone with an Iman in Pakistan. A formal ceremony followed later that month and the petitioner asserted that a marriage deed was drawn up. The respondent denied that either event had occurred.

Francis J held that the petitioner was entitled to a decree of nullity and preferred her evidence as to the parties’ intention and belief that the ceremony in 2003 would produce a valid ceremony of marriage.

No. BV15D09955

Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 3380 (Fam)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION


Royal Courts of Justice


Thursday, 24th November 2016



Before:


MR. JUSTICE FRANCIS
(In Private)


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


B E T W E E N :




K
Applicant


- and -


K
Respondent


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Transcribed by BEVERLEY F. NUNNERY & CO.
(a trading name of Opus 2 International Limited)
Official Court Reporters and Audio Transcribers
25 Southampton Buildings, London WC2A 1AL
Tel: 020 7831 5627 Fax: 020 7831 7737
info@beverleynunnery.com


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


MR. M. LEWIS (instructed by Crimson Phoenix Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Applicant.
MR. S. NIGAR (instructed by Directus Law) appeared on behalf of the Respondent.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




J U D G M E N T

K v K [2016] EWHC 3380 (Fam).rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Marriage and Divorce
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from