- Family Law
- Lawyers & Staff
- Cases & Articles
- Contact Us
NOTICE ALERT IN LIGHT OF COVID-19
WHAT WE PROPOSE AND HOW WE CAN ASSIST
At Watson & Watson our clients come first. Please be assured of our continued dedicated services to all current and new clients.
As we have done in the past, we will continue to offer alternative conferencing methods ie video conferencing, skype or telephone conferences. Reviewing of all documentation provided to us prior to any initial conference will be all inclusive of our set fee. Do not hesitate to contact Shereen Da Gloria on (02) 9221 6011 should you have any concerns.
The Family Law Act 1975 (Section 48(1)) provides that for a Divorce Order in relation to marriage shall be made on the grounds that the marriage has broken down irretrievably and this will require the spouses to have been separated for at least 12 months. An order for Divorce made on the basis that there was in existence a valid marriage. That is not the case with annulment of marriage.
The Family Law Act 1975 provides (Section 51) that an Application for a Decree of Nullity of Marriage shall be based on the ground that the marriage is void. If the Court makes a Decree of Nullity of Marriage the outcome is as if the marriage had never taken place. The parties to the marriage do not need to have been separated for 12 months.
The Marriage Act 1961 (Cth) provides that a marriage will be void if one or more of the grounds set out in Section 23B are found and exist, where the reasons set out in Section 48 exist, or the consent of either party to being married is not a real consent because that party was mistaken as to the nature of the ceremony performed.
The Family Court of Australia was required to determine an Application for a Decree of Nullity of Marriage in the case of Thang v Lua (2019) Family Court of Australia
1 April 2019. In that case the facts were as follows:
The Court found that the marriage was void (a nullity) because the consent of the Applicant was not real consent because he had mistaken the nature of the ceremony performed. The Court also found that the Celebrant did not say the words required to be spoken in a marriage ceremony as required by Section 45 of the Marriage Act. The Court also found that the Applicant was mistaken as to the nature of the ceremony in that he thought it was the signing of an Application in relation to a de facto relationship and not a marriage ceremony.
The marriage was annulled. There was never a marriage.
If you have any concerns regarding the validity of your marriage or are seeking to have your marriage annulled however are unsure of your rights, please contact Richard Watson Senior Family Law Solicitor or his Personal Assistant Shereen Da Gloria to discuss your concerns and seek timely advice.
This is only a preliminary view and is not to be taken as legal advice without first contacting Watson & Watson Solicitors on 9221 6011.
Personal Experienced Professional Affordable
Phone 02 9221 6011Send us your enquiry