F. (P.) v. O'M. (G.) [2000] IESC 81; [2001] 3 IR 1 (28 November 2000)

F. (P.) v. O'M. (G.) [2000] IESC 81; [2001] 3 IR 1 (28 November 2000)

Non-disclosure of pre-marital misconduct or an affair by one party does not vitiate the other's consent so as to render the marriage void for want of full, free, and informed consent. The law of nullity does not extend to misrepresentation by silence regarding pre-marital conduct. The subjective test for informed consent applies in cases of duress or incapacity, not to non-disclosure of conduct. Certainty in marriage and public policy preclude expanding nullity grounds to include such non-disclosure.

Citation
[2000] IESC 81
Parties
Appellant/petitioner: P. F.; Respondent: G. O'M. (otherwise G. F.)
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal (nullity of Marriage) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Nullity of Marriage, Consent to Marriage, Misrepresentation, Duress, Public Policy in Marriage
Family Law Nullity of Marriage Consent to Marriage Misrepresentation Duress Public Policy in Marriage

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P. F.

Appellant/petitioner

G. O'M. (otherwise G. F.)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (nullity of Marriage) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-disclosure of an affair by the respondent prior to marriage vitiates the petitioner's consent and renders the marriage void for want of full, free and informed consent
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in law in confining circumstances vitiating consent to disposition or proclivity rather than conduct
  3. 3 Whether the law of nullity should be expanded to include misrepresentation by silence regarding pre-marital conduct

Ratio Decidendi

Non-disclosure of pre-marital misconduct or an affair by one party does not vitiate the other's consent so as to render the marriage void for want of full, free, and informed consent. The law of nullity does not extend to misrepresentation by silence regarding pre-marital conduct. The subjective test for informed consent applies in cases of duress or incapacity, not to non-disclosure of conduct. Certainty in marriage and public policy preclude expanding nullity grounds to include such non-disclosure.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; order of High Court judge refusing decree of nullity upheld.
  • No order as to costs in High Court; cross-appeal on costs dismissed.