Nullity

On 6 April 2022 the provisions of the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (DDSA 2020) came into effect. DDSA 2020 does not make substantive changes to the law regarding nullity proceedings, the grounds on which nullity proceedings may be brought remain unchanged. There are, however, some consequential changes to the procedure affecting applications for a nullity order or nullity of marriage order that are issued on or after 6 April 2022. It is important to ensure that the correct procedure is followed depending on when the application was issued.

Void and voidable marriages

A marriage may be annulled if the marriage is void or voidable:

  1. a void marriage is one that is regarded by the court as never having taken place and is void at its inception—a decree is simply declaratory

  2. a voidable marriage is one that will be regarded as a valid marriage subsisting until a decree annulling it has been pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction

The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) sets out the grounds on which a marriage may be void or voidable. Corresponding provisions are

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Family News

Monumental Supreme Court decision on matrimonialisation and sharing principle (Standish v Standish)

Family analysis: The Supreme Court’s much-anticipated judgment confirms unequivocally that the sharing principle does not apply to non-matrimonial property. Sharing of matrimonial property will usually be 50:50, though there may be a departure from equal division where justified. Non-matrimonial property typically has either a pre-marital origin, or, where it is received during the currency of the marriage, an external source (eg an inheritance). Title to an asset is expressly not determinative as to whether that asset is or is not matrimonial. Though non-matrimonial property may become matrimonial (ie ‘matrimonialisation’) this will depend on how the parties have been dealing with the asset and whether, over time, they have been treating that asset as shared between them. The concept of matrimonialisation is to be applied neither ‘widely’ nor ‘narrowly’ (contrary to what the Court of Appeal had held)—again, the enquiry should focus on how the parties have dealt with the asset. Where an asset is transferred from one spouse to another with the intention to save tax (as had occurred in the case), this will not normally show that the asset is being treated as shared. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the decision to dismiss the wife’s appeal, though it did not wholly agree with the Court of Appeal’s reasoning. Pursuant to that decision (made on the sharing basis) the wife would be provided with circa £25m of the total assets figure of circa £132.6m, being half of the matrimonial assets figure of £50.48m. David Wilkinson, solicitor at Slater Heelis, considers the judgment.

View Family by content type :

Popular documents