Family court rules on disputed marriage

11 Feb 2025Court Report

The Family Court resolved a complex case involving a disputed civil marriage between Ms Z and Mr Z

Background

The Family Court, sitting at Preston County Court, delivered a judgment on a contentious case involving a disputed marriage between Ms Z and Mr Z. The case centred on whether a civil marriage took place at X Registry Office on 14 December 2009. The matter was brought before Mr Justice Trowell following an appeal that overturned a previous decision by DJ Buckley.

Case Details

Ms Z claimed that she and Mr Z were married in a civil ceremony, presenting a marriage certificate as evidence. Mr Z, however, denied attending the ceremony, alleging that an imposter was used to deceive the registrar. The case was complicated by a lack of supporting evidence, such as photographs or receipts, and conflicting accounts from both parties.

Legal Arguments

Ms Z's legal team argued that the marriage certificate should be considered prima facie evidence of the marriage. Mr Z's counsel contended that the certificate was fraudulent, and that Ms Z had orchestrated the deception. The court had to weigh the credibility of the parties and the available evidence, including the lack of corroboration from witnesses to the ceremony.

Judgment

Mr Justice Trowell ruled in favour of Ms Z, finding that the evidence of the marriage certificate and the entry in the register outweighed the allegations of fraud. The judge noted the absence of expert handwriting analysis to challenge the authenticity of Mr Z's signature on the certificate and considered the procedural safeguards typically in place during a civil marriage ceremony.

Credibility and Conduct

The judgment also considered the credibility of the parties. Mr Z's past conviction for perverting the course of justice and his admission of creating a false document to deceive Ms Z were weighed against his denial of the marriage. The court found that these factors undermined Mr Z's credibility.

Implications

The ruling allows Ms Z to pursue financial remedies, contingent on the recognition of the civil marriage. The court's decision underscores the importance of documentary evidence in family law disputes and the challenges of proving allegations of fraud without expert testimony.

Next Steps

The court anticipated a potential costs application, suggesting that the matter could be resolved through written submissions unless an agreement was reached. The judgment also invited the parties to prepare a draft order to progress any financial remedy applications.

Conclusion

This case highlights the complexities involved in family law disputes, particularly where cultural practices intersect with legal requirements. The court's decision reflects a careful consideration of the evidence and legal principles, providing clarity on the status of the disputed marriage.