Sohrab v. Khan [2002] ScotCS 117 (23rd April, 2002)

Sohrab v. Khan [2002] ScotCS 117 (23rd April, 2002)

The court found that the pursuer did not give genuine consent to the marriage, as her will was overborne by duress from her parents, rendering the marriage void. Additionally, the marriage was not properly solemnised in accordance with statutory requirements, as no Marriage Schedule existed for the actual ceremony on 13 December 1998, and the subsequent registration related to a different date. Section 23A did not save the marriage because the registration was based on a ceremony that never took place, and the statutory requirements were not met.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 117
Parties
Pursuer: Aneeka Sohrab; Defender: Raja Sulman Khan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Nullity of Marriage / Outer House, Court of Session, Proof
Outcome
Decree of nullity granted; marriage declared void.
Legal Topics
Nullity of Marriage, Consent and Duress, Marriage Registration Formalities, Arranged Marriage, Marriage (scotland) Act 1977
Family Law Marriage Law Nullity of Marriage Consent and Duress Marriage Registration Formalities Arranged Marriage Marriage (scotland) Act 1977

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aneeka Sohrab

Pursuer

Raja Sulman Khan

Defender

Procedural Posture

Nullity of Marriage / Outer House, Court of Session, Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's consent to marriage was vitiated by duress
  2. 2 Whether the marriage was void for failure to comply with statutory registration formalities

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the pursuer did not give genuine consent to the marriage, as her will was overborne by duress from her parents, rendering the marriage void. Additionally, the marriage was not properly solemnised in accordance with statutory requirements, as no Marriage Schedule existed for the actual ceremony on 13 December 1998, and the subsequent registration related to a different date. Section 23A did not save the marriage because the registration was based on a ceremony that never took place, and the statutory requirements were not met.

Court Disposition

Decree of nullity granted; marriage declared void.

Orders

  • Marriage between pursuer and defender declared null and void.
  • No order as to expenses specified in the provided text.