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, including an undisclosed affair, does not vitiate consent so as to render a marriage void for want of full, free and informed consent. The law of nullity does not extend to misrepresentation by silence regarding conduct, and the subjective test for informed consent applies only in cases of duress or incapacity, not to undisclosed conduct. Certainty in marriage and public policy preclude such an extension of nullity grounds.

Citation
[2001] 3 IR 1
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, Costs
Family Law Nullity of Marriage Consent to Marriage Misrepresentation Duress Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 20 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 the circumstances of substance, ignorance of which renders consent uninformed, to matters of disposition or proclivity rather than conduct.
  3. 3 Whether the law of nullity should be extended to include misrepresentation by silence regarding pre-marital conduct.

Ratio Decidendi

Non-disclosure of pre-marital misconduct, including an undisclosed affair, does not vitiate consent so as to render a marriage void for want of full, free and informed consent. The law of nullity does not extend to misrepresentation by silence regarding conduct, and the subjective test for informed consent applies only in cases of duress or incapacity, not to undisclosed conduct. Certainty in marriage and public policy preclude such an extension of nullity grounds.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court refusing decree of nullity upheld.
  • No order as to costs in the High Court; Supreme Court declines to interfere with High Court's discretion on costs.