A high court judge has expressed surprise that a couple in a long-standing marriage could come before the courts seeking to have their relationship annulled without someone in court to defend the marital status of the parties.
Mr Justice Budd, in a preliminary ruling in a case where a husband is seeking a nullity decree in respect of a marriage contracted in 1993, made his observation in a judgment delivered yesterday.
Speaking generally of marriage cases which come before the courts, he said: "It is surprising, in a State in which the institution of marriage is noted with approval in the Constitution and where marital status is accorded respect, that cases in which a couple went through a marriage ceremony more than 20 years ago and from which liaison there may be a number of children, should now be coming before the court in nullity cases, based on psychological grounds, without there being a legitimus contradictor to defend the marital status of the parties, which might be thought to affect the entire community."
The judge ruled that a medical inspector appointed by the Master of the High Court in May 1997 to carry out a psychiatric examination of both the husband and wife should operate within the terms of the order appointing him and not interview a number of third-party informants.
The husband had told the medical inspector that four friends of himself and his brother had information relevant to the marriage relationship.
The judge said it had become clear that the medical inspector felt that interviews with third-party informants, who had known the parties at the time of the marriage, could assist him in forming an opinion as to whether either party was suffering from a personality disorder at the time.
But Mr Justice Budd pointed out there was no provision in the court rules for the inspector to interview any person other than the parties to the action. It was clear from the wording of the Master's Order that the inspector was appointed on the basis that he would examine the husband and wife, with no mention whatsoever of interviews with third-party informants.