2,443
edits
Difference between revisions of "Married Spouses and the Law on Marriage"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Married Spouses and the Law on Marriage (view source)
Revision as of 03:27, 3 May 2013
, 03:27, 3 May 2013→Failure to consummate a marriage
Gayla Reid (talk | contribs) m (→Void marriages) |
Gayla Reid (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
===Failure to consummate a marriage=== | ===Failure to consummate a marriage=== | ||
It used to be the case, and many people think this is still true, that if the spouses never had sex the marriage was voidable. The common law has developed in a somewhat different direction. A spouse must have either a complete inability to have sex because of some physical problem, or an "invincible repugnance" to the prospect of sex which is psychological in nature. Be warned that one instance of consummation will defeat either spouse's ability to claim inability to consummate as a ground of voidability. | It used to be the | ||
<span class="noglossary">case</span>, and many people think this is still true, that if the spouses never had sex the marriage was voidable. The common law has developed in a somewhat different direction. A spouse must have either a complete inability to have sex because of some physical problem, or an "invincible repugnance" to the prospect of sex which is psychological in nature. Be warned that one instance of consummation will defeat either spouse's ability to claim inability to consummate as a ground of voidability. | |||
A 2004 case of the BC Supreme Court, ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1q1m1 Grewal v. Sohal]'', 2004 BCSC 1549, reviewed the law on applications to annul a marriage based on non-consummation. The court held that the applicant must prove that: | A 2004 case of the BC Supreme Court, ''[http://canlii.ca/t/1q1m1 Grewal v. Sohal]'', 2004 BCSC 1549, reviewed the law on applications to annul a marriage based on non-consummation. The court held that the applicant must prove that: | ||
