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

'The benefits of marriage in all but name'? Same-sex couples and the Civil Partnership Act 2004

Sep 29, 2018, 16:12 PM
Title : 'The benefits of marriage in all but name'? Same-sex couples and the Civil Partnership Act 2004
Slug : the-benefits-of-marriage-in-all-but-name-same-sex-couples-and-the-civil-partnership-act-2004
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Jun 5, 2007, 06:08 AM
Article ID : 84939

Nicholas Bamforth. Should marriage and civil partnerships be seen as parallel institutions for all major civil purposes? Although the Civil Partnership Act 2004 represents recognition of the importance of stable and committed same sex relationships, there is a symbolic message sent by having separate regimes for same sex and opposite sex couples. Is it acceptable to maintain marriage and civil partnerships as mutually exclusive institutions for opposite sex and same sex couples respectively under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950? This article considers the nature and legitimacy of the distinction between marriage and civil partnership, looking in detail at the provisions of the Civil Partnership Act 2004, the implications of relevant cases which have come before the European Court of Human Rights and the reasoning given in Wilkinson v Kitzinger [2006] EWHC 2022 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 296 for maintaining the distinction. Can a successful future challenge to the distinction be ruled out? Read the full article in Child and Family Law Quarterly, Vol 19, No 2, 2007.

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