The court was asked whether for the purposes of English divorce and connected proceedings a Talaq pronounced by the respondent husband in Saudi Arabia and placed by Deed of Confirmation before the Sharia Court is entitled to be afforded recognition in this jurisdiction. The parties had married in England.
Held: It was to be recognised: ‘I ask what is the purpose and policy of s46(1) and the International Convention to which it gives effect? The answer it seems to me is that it provides a mechanism to afford recognition to a Sharia divorce which is more than and has developed from mere oral delivery so that there can be no issue that it has been pronounced. It is also required to be effective within its own jurisdiction. If that is right, the Saudi process as now performed using the machinery adopted by the husband has produced a divorce religiously valid as certified by a religious Court and further effecting a full change of civil status in the eye of the state and the society in which it was pronounced via the registration mechanism. I find it difficult to classify that result and the process by which it was achieved it as outside the intention and boundaries of our recognition code.’
Judges:
Horowitz QC J
Citations:
[2011] EWHC B23 (Fam)
Links:
Statutes:
Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 17, Family Law Act 1986 5491) 46(2), 1970 Hague Convention on the Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separation
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Zaal v Zaal FD 1982
The English wife had married a Dubai husband under muslim law. H pronounced talaq in Dubai. W, wanting to divorce him for adultery, said it was ineffective since she had not had notice of it.
Held: The Talaq was effective under Dubai law, and . .
Cited – Chaudhary v Chaudhary 1985
The Pakistani husband pronounced bare Talaq in Sharia form before witnesses in Kashmir, although administered by Pakistan a territory to which the Muslim Family Ordinance 1961 did not apply. Recognition of the Talaq divorce had been refused by Wood . .
Cited – Sulaiman v Juffali FD 9-Nov-2001
A talaq pronounced in England as between parties who were Saudi nationals was not to be recognised in English law as a valid extra judicial overseas divorce, even though it otherwise complied with Sharia law. Section 44(1)(a) provides that no . .
Cited – Agbaje v Akinnoye-Agbaje SC 10-Mar-2010
The parties had divorced in Nigeria, but the former wife now sought relief in the UK under section 10 of the 194 Act. The wife said that she lived here, but the order made in Nigeria was severely detrimental requiring her either to live here in . .
Cited – Quazi v Quazi HL 1979
The husband had pronounced a talaq in Pakistan, in accordance with the 1961 Muslim Family Ordinance. The question was whether the English court had jurisdiction on the wife’s petition to dissolve the marriage and make consequential orders relating . .
Cited – H v H (The Queen’s Proctor Intervening) (Validity of Japanese Divorce) FD 2006
The court considered the validity of a consensual form of divorce kyogi rikon in Japanese law, the most common form of divorce in Japan. The consent is by written form not judicial act but the signing must be followed by formal registration before a . .
Cited – El Fadl v El Fadl FD 2000
The court was asked as to the recognition of a Sharia compliant divorce between Lebanese Muslims. Under the relevant Lebanese 1962 legislation a Talaq was to be pronounced before 2 witnesses, a requirement of most systems of traditional Islamic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family, International
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.450357