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 J.
Held: The husband’s appeal was dismissed. Balcombe J said: ‘Prima facie, I would have considered that recognition of the validity of a divorce (which brings to an end the status of marriage) obtained by a procedure of which one party (the wife) has no notice, and no opportunity to take part is contrary to public policy. However, the specific provisions of paragraphs (i) and (ii) of section 8(2)(a) of the 1973 Act make it clear that notice, and an opportunity to take part need not be given if the nature of the proceedings (as in the case of a Talaq) is such as to render such requirements unnecessary. However, where, as here, both parties were resident and domiciled in England at the date of the ‘bare’ talaq of 12th May 1978 – and in this respect the case is very different from Quazi – so that the only reason for the husband’s going to Kashmir for his divorce was to obtain the collateral advantage of preventing the wife from obtaining financial relief to which she would be entitled under an English divorce, then in my judgment, the recognition of such a divorce would be manifestly contrary to public policy. (I note, in passing, that because of the recent change in the law, it would not now be possible for the husband to obtain such a collateral advantage, even without recourse to the doctrine of public policy. It seems probable that there will now be many fewer attempts to rely on section 2(a) of the 1971 Act)’
Judges:
Balcombe J
Citations:
[1985] FLR 476, [1985] Fam 19
Statutes:
Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separations Act 1971
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 by:
Cited – H v S FD 18-Nov-2011
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 . .
Cited – Golubovich v Golubovich CA 21-May-2010
The court was asked to rule as to the recognition of a foreign (Moscow) decree of divorce obtained in breach of an Hemain injunction. The Russian proceedings had got to a stage requiring H positively to apply to prevent the decree.
Held: The . .
Cited – H v H FD 12-Dec-2007
The parties disputed the effect of a talaq divorce granted to H in Pakistan. W disputed that notice of the divorce had been served upon her. The notice was not now available.
Held: H’s evidence was credible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family, International
Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.450570