Nullity

• Author: Stephen G.A. Pitel/Nicholas S. Rafferty
• Profession: Faculty of Law, University of Western Ontario/Faculty of Law, University of Calgary
• Pages: 427-439

427

CHAP TER 23

NULLIT Y

A. VOID A ND VOIDABLE M A R R I AGES

The law distingui shes between void and voidable marriages. In De

Rene ville v. De Ren eville, Lord Greene M.R. explained the disti nction in

the following manner:

a void marriage is one t hat will be regarde d by every court in any

case in which t he existence of the m arria ge is in issue as never h av-

ing taken place and c an be so treated by both part ies to it without the

necessity of any decree annulling it: a voidable marriage is one that

will be regarded by e very court as a valid sub sisting mar riage until

a decree annulling it has been pronounced by a court of competent

jurisdict ion.1

In the past, the di stinction was of part icular consequence in the deter-

mination of the domicile of the parties. At common law, in the case of

a voidable marriage, a mar ried woman’s domicile was dependent upon

that of her husband. A void marriage, on the other ha nd, 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

1 [1948] P. 100 at 111 (C.A.) [De Reneville].

2Savelieff v. Glouchkoff (1964), 45 D.L.R. (2d) 520 (B.C.C.A.) [Savelieff].

3 See Chapter 2.