G. v. G [1922] ScotLR 125 (07 December 1922)

G. v. G [1922] ScotLR 125 (07 December 1922)

The court held that the non-consummation of the marriage was due to the wife's unwillingness, not incapacity. There was no evidence of structural or psychological incapacity, and the facts pointed to a persistent but wilful refusal. As such, the pursuer was not entitled to a decree of nullity. Further, the periods during which the parties lived together were too short to establish desertion, and the defender's conduct did not amount to malicious desertion for the statutory period. The action was dismissed.

Citation
[1922] ScotLR 125
Parties
Pursuer: G.; Defender: G.
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 December 1922
Procedural Posture
Action for Nullity of Marriage Or, Alternatively, Divorce / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Dismissal at First Instance
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Nullity of Marriage, Impotency, Desertion, Non Consummation, Refusal of Sexual Intercourse
Family Law Nullity of Marriage Impotency Desertion Non Consummation Refusal of Sexual Intercourse

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G.

Pursuer

G.

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action for Nullity of Marriage Or, Alternatively, Divorce / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Dismissal at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-consummation of marriage due to wife's refusal amounts to incapacity justifying nullity
  2. 2 Whether persistent refusal to consummate constitutes desertion entitling to divorce

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the non-consummation of the marriage was due to the wife's unwillingness, not incapacity. There was no evidence of structural or psychological incapacity, and the facts pointed to a persistent but wilful refusal. As such, the pursuer was not entitled to a decree of nullity. Further, the periods during which the parties lived together were too short to establish desertion, and the defender's conduct did not amount to malicious desertion for the statutory period. The action was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Decree of nullity refused
  • Decree of divorce refused