Rights corner
The English court rejects marriage over phone
Ershadul Alam
The appellate Court comprising three senior judges- Mr. Justice Wall, Mr. Justice Thorpe and Lady Justice Hallett ruled in the case of Westminster City Council v IC and Others that a marriage which had been made over a telephone was invalid, even though it was valid under Islamic law. The judgment published in the last month produced much debate among the personal law experts of England.
The ceremony took place in September 2006.
The 26-year-old groom residing in England was mentally handicapped and had never met his bride residing in Bangladesh. The parents of the groom originated from Bangladesh but resident in England for many years. The groom was born in 1981 and suffered from severe impairment of intellectual functioning and autism. He needed considerable support in all areas of his life and could not be left alone without risk. He received home care five mornings a week before he attended a day centre. The local authority had been involved in supporting and protecting him since he was four years old. The Court observed that the role of marriage in the life of one so handicapped was inconceivable in English society and was 'potentially highly injurious' as stated by the court.
The lawyers of the parents argued that it should therefore be recognized in English law. The parents also argued that their son had married in a Muslim ceremony by telephone. The court in response to the argument stated that the groom was unable to give valid consent to the marriage under English Law rather was suggestible and vulnerable. Moreover, the groom lacked the capacity to marry and consent to sexual intercourse and hence, as a matter of law, marriage is precluded. In addition to this the court order prevents contact of the bride and the groom. But under the Islamic Law and the laws of Bangladesh the said marriage is valid though neither party met each other. The groom lacked the capacity to understand he introduction of the bride into his life, which would be likely to destroy his equilibrium or destabilise his emotional sate.
In Bangladesh, the marriage was officially viewed to have taken place on Bangladeshi soil, but as the family had intended to bring the “bride” to Britain, British law had to take precedence.
The panel of judges did not allow the parents the right of appeal to the House of Lords, and a court order ensures that bride and the groom will never be allowed to meet. A full High Court hearing on IC's case will be held in August 2008.
Source: Timesonline
Ershadul Alam is a human rights lawyer.
|
