(Consistory Court of London) Sir William Scott considered the notion of marriage: ‘The opinions which have divided the world, or writers at least, on this subject, are, generally, two. It is held by some persons that marriage is a contract merely civil – by others, that it is a sacred, religious, and spiritual contract, and only to be so considered. The jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Court was founded on ideas of this last described nature; but in a more correct view of this subject, I conceive that neither of these opinions is perfectly accurate. According to juster notions of the nature of the marriage contract, it is not merely either a civil or religious contract; and, at the present time is not to be considered as originally and simply one or the other. It is a contract according to the law of nature, antecedent to civil institution, and which may take place to all intents and purposes, whenever two persons of different sexes engage, by mutual contracts, to live together.’
Judges:
Sir William Scott
Citations:
(1795) 1 Hag Con 216, [1795] EngR 4123, (1795) 1 Hag Con 216, (1795) 161 ER 530
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – J v S T (Formerly J) CA 21-Nov-1996
The parties had married, but the male partner was a transsexual, having been born female and having undergone treatment for Gender Identity Dysphoria. After IVF treatment, the couple had a child. As the marriage broke down the truth was revealed in . .
Cited – Johns and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Derby City Council and Another Admn 28-Feb-2011
The claimants had acted as foster carers for several years, but challenged a potential decision to discontinue that when, as committed Christians, they refused to sign to agree to treat without differentiation any child brought to them who might be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family
Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.235299