Showing posts with label family law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family law. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

MUSLIM MARRIAGE RECOGNITION IN IRELAND

The media is currently filled with discussion of marriage rights and recognition, not least because of the historic US Supreme Court ruling yesterday on the Defence of Marriage Act in California. Marriage is something that is deeply ingrained in religion and culture and marriage practices vary around the world. In Ireland, the struggle for marital recognition is not confined to the LGBT community. In Muslim societies, culture, tradition, customs and formalities are often very different to what Ireland is used to or accept as forming what we recognise to be a valid marriage. This poses a number of difficulties for couples who now live in Ireland and whose marriages or divorces were carried out under a different set of rules. 

Legal recognition in Ireland of Islamic marriage practices can have far-reaching consequences for family reunification in immigration law. Examples of the practices that prove problematic in Irish law include polygamous marriages and Muslim divorce. In some Islamic countries it is permissible for a man to have multiple wives or to obtain a unilateral divorce without governmental or judicial involvement. 

Academics have noted three stages to the recognition of foreign marriages in Ireland. The first of these is capacity to marry, and a person lacks capacity to marry if they have a prior marriage that is still valid. The second required element is that the marriage was legal in the jurisdiction where it was celebrated. Thirdly, the marriage must not be unrecognisable from the Irish idea of marriage. 

In the case of H v A it was held that the polygamous marriage of a Lebanese man in his native country couldn’t be recognised under Irish law. However, if a marriage is potentially polygamous but monogamous in practice then the marriage can be recognised in Ireland. In Hamza v Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform it was held that a couple who were married under a law that allowed polygamy but weren’t parties to a polygamous marriage could have their marriage recognised. 

However, the law on polygamy is not without anomaly. As counsel for the respondent pointed out in H v A, if a man is married to more than one woman in his home country, the courts will deem that those marriages are null and void. However, if a man marries one woman in his home country and then marries another woman in Ireland then the latter marriage will be held to be void. 

The courts have not yet adjudicated on whether a talaq, a unilateral divorce obtained in an Islamic country, will be recognised under the Domicile and Recognition of Foreign Divorces Act 1986. S5 (7) of that Act refers to the necessity for certain proceedings for a divorce to be valid but it remains to be seen whether the procedure for obtaining a talaq will meet these requirements, as the divorce is obtained unilaterally without the involvement of state agencies.

Both of these situations have an impact for family reunification in immigration law. In Irish law, a person who has successfully sought asylum can apply for a visa for their spouse to live in Ireland. If Irish law does not recognise the validity of their marriage, this will clearly thwart the application process. For these purposes it seems clear that a polygamous marriage will not be allowed, whereas a potentially polygamous one will be. More clarity on the status of Islamic divorce would be welcome, as some clients of Brophy Solicitors are left in a state of uncertainty about whether their second marriage will be recognised as valid for the purposes of reunification. We are receiving more and more requests to appeal visa refusal decisions where applicants have been refused permission to join their Irish/lawfully resident spouse based on the fact that their marriage is not a valid marriage. This includes cases where the applicant and their spouse have children together.

Thursday, June 13, 2013

IT’S OUR RIGHT TO MARRY! IRISH REGISTRARS CONTINUE TO WRONGLY REFUSE COUPLES THEIR RIGHT TO MARRY

In a short space of weeks, we received a number of complaints from aggrieved clients who, having served their notification of intention to marry, were refused permission to marry by local registrars. The cases concern EU nationals and their non-EEA partners who contacted us in a state of distress and anxiety having been advised that an objection to their marriage was raised and that their marriage would not be going ahead as planned. 

In 2011 we issued proceedings regarding a similar situation involving an EU national and her husband who suffered sheer humiliation and deep distress when an objection was lodged in respect of their marriage on the morning of their wedding!! The bride and her husband-to-be were just about ready to commence celebrating their marriage before family and fiends, many of whom had flown to Ireland from abroad for the occasion. But the actual marriage took place months later following a court settlement resulting in the objection being lifted. Their day was ruined and their financial loss was significant. 

Two years later we see the problem arising again although we managed to tackle this head on without resorting to the High Court. Our clients were advised that under the provisions of section 51(2) of the Civil Registration Act, 2004 that a registered solemniser shall not solemnise a marriage unless he/she is satisfied that the parties to the marriage understand the nature of the marriage ceremony and the declaration that they accept each other as husband and wife. In this case the registered solemniser was not satisfied that our clients understand the nature of their marriage ceremony and the declarations that they accept each other as husband and wife and you felt that an ‘offence’ may have been committed under section 51(2). An Garda Siochana were notified and asked to investigate a possible offence under this section. Which offence was the registrar referring to? This section does not refer to any offence that would have been applicable to our clients. The legislation as it stands does not cover any offence indicated by the Registrar. 

The situation was previously fleshed out in court by Justice Hogan in Izmailovic & Anor -v- Commissioner of an Garda Siochana & Ors [2011] IEHC 32 when the marriage of a couple was intercepted by the State and the groom arrested on the grounds that the Gardai believed his marriage was one of convenience. Justice Hogan concluded as follows: ‘ I quite appreciate that the decision in this case may present the authorities with very considerable difficulties in this problematic area. But, as I indicated at the hearing, if the law in this area is considered to be unsatisfactory, then it is, of course, in principle open to the Oireachtas and, if needs be, the Union legislature to address these questions. As this decision in its own way illustrates, the problems encountered here are difficult ones and present complex questions of public policy in relation to marriage and immigration. These, however, are ultimately policy questions which only the Oireachtas and, again if needs be, the Union legislature can resolve.’ 

Following a detailed complaint sent to the Registrar on behalf of our most recent clients in this matter, the objection was quickly lifted and they are free to marry. Although delighted with the outcome, the stress and anxiety suffered by our clients was considerable and is something they now want to put behind them. 

Sarah Henry