Nullity

AuthorStephen G.A. Pitel; Nicholas S. Rafferty
Pages451-463
CHAPTER
23
NULLITY
A.
VOID
AND
VOIDABLE
MARRIAGES
The
law
distinguishes
between
void
and
voidable
marriages.
In
De
Rene-
ville
v
De
Reneville,
Lord
Greene
MR
explained
the
distinction
in
the
fol
lowing
manner:
a
void
marriage
is
one
that
will
be
regarded
by
every
court
in
any
case
in
which
the
existence
of
the
marriage
is
in
issue
as
never
having
taken
place
and
can
be
so
treated
by
both
parties
to
it
without
the
necessity
of
any
decree
annulling
it:
a
voidable
marriage
is
one
that
will
be
re
garded
by
every
court
as
a
valid
subsisting
marriage
until
a
decree
an
nulling
it
has
been
pronounced
by
a
court
of
competent
jurisdiction.
1
In
the
past,
the
distinction
was
of
particular
consequence
in
the
deter
mination
of
the
domicile
of
the
parties.
At
common
law,
in
the
case
of
a
voidable
marriage,
a
married
woman
s
domicile
was
dependent
upon
that
of
her
husband.
A
void
marriage,
on
the
other
hand,
was
regarded
as
a
complete
nullity
and
thus
a
woman
was
free
to
acquire
a
domi
cile
separate
from
that
of
her
supposed
husband.
2
Since
the
abolition
of
a
married
woman
s
domicile
of
dependency,
3
the
importance
of
the
distinction
has
lessened
substantially.
Any
remaining
significance
is
1
[1948]
P
100
at
111
(CA)
[De
Reneville],
2
Savelieff
v
Glouchkoff
(1964),
45
DLR
(2d)
520
(BCCA)
[Saveliejf],
3
See
Chapter
2.
451

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT