She married in 1899. Please what do you mean by "draw a conclusion of law"? Philomena "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] > It occurred to me afterwards: if she wanted to remarry, having a piece of > paper getting rid of her existing marriage is easier than asking the > celebrant to draw a conclusion of law. > > Doug. > > Phil Doherty wrote: > >> Thank you Doug for that clear answer. >> Philomena >> >> >> "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message >> news:[email protected] >>> Phil Doherty wrote: >>> >>>> Could someone please help with a question re Divorce ? >>>> >>>> Would a lady need to apply for a divorce if her husband had committed >>>> bigamy?. >>>> Family history says it was a bigamous marriage.If it was were they >>>> married >>>> in the eyes of the law >>>> >>>> Yesterday looking on Trove I notice she petitioned on the grounds of >>>> desertion and >>>> adultery . And was granted a decree nisi with cost. >>>> >>>> Thank you in anticipation of a reply >>>> Philomena >>> >>> A bigamous marriage is a nullity. The lady would not need to apply for >>> a >>> divorce, but she would have been wise to get a decree of nullity before >>> remarrying, just in case husband's first marriage was invalid. Then the >>> impediment to the second marriage disappears, and she is hitched after >>> all. >>> >>> If she applied for nullity and divorce at the same time, they deal with >>> the >>> nullity first. If there is no valid marriage, it doesn't need to be >>> dissolved. But if she applied for divorce only, the validity of the >>> marriage would have been assumed. >>> >>> HTH, >>> >>> Doug. >

A minister of religion (or a civil celebrant) is not a lawyer. If the lady came to him and said "I am married, but my first marriage is void for bigamy," he might answer "How do I know that? Go and obtain a decree of nullity." A bigamous marriage is wholly void; it doesn't need a Court declaration, but non-lawyers aren't going to ask their own lawyer. They are going to want an official Court or Registry document. Because the marriage was void from the beginning, there is no decree nisi. The applicant is given a decree absolute immediately. There used to be "voidable" marriages where a decree nisi was granted, but they were abolished in 1981, by the Family Law Act. You may come across one occasionally, but they were rare. Doug. Phil Doherty wrote: > She married in 1899. > Please what do you mean by "draw a conclusion of law"? > Philomena > > > > > "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message > news:[email protected] >> It occurred to me afterwards: if she wanted to remarry, having a piece of >> paper getting rid of her existing marriage is easier than asking the >> celebrant to draw a conclusion of law. >> >> Doug. >> >> Phil Doherty wrote: >> >>> Thank you Doug for that clear answer. >>> Philomena >>> >>> >>> "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message >>> news:[email protected] >>>> Phil Doherty wrote: >>>> >>>>> Could someone please help with a question re Divorce ? >>>>> >>>>> Would a lady need to apply for a divorce if her husband had committed >>>>> bigamy?. >>>>> Family history says it was a bigamous marriage.If it was were they >>>>> married >>>>> in the eyes of the law >>>>> >>>>> Yesterday looking on Trove I notice she petitioned on the grounds of >>>>> desertion and >>>>> adultery . And was granted a decree nisi with cost. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you in anticipation of a reply >>>>> Philomena >>>> >>>> A bigamous marriage is a nullity. The lady would not need to apply for >>>> a >>>> divorce, but she would have been wise to get a decree of nullity before >>>> remarrying, just in case husband's first marriage was invalid. Then >>>> the impediment to the second marriage disappears, and she is hitched >>>> after all. >>>> >>>> If she applied for nullity and divorce at the same time, they deal with >>>> the >>>> nullity first. If there is no valid marriage, it doesn't need to be >>>> dissolved. But if she applied for divorce only, the validity of the >>>> marriage would have been assumed. >>>> >>>> HTH, >>>> >>>> Doug. >>

Once again thank you Doug. "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] >A minister of religion (or a civil celebrant) is not a lawyer. If the lady > came to him and said "I am married, but my first marriage is void for > bigamy," he might answer "How do I know that? Go and obtain a decree of > nullity." A bigamous marriage is wholly void; it doesn't need a Court > declaration, but non-lawyers aren't going to ask their own lawyer. They > are > going to want an official Court or Registry document. > > Because the marriage was void from the beginning, there is no decree nisi. > The applicant is given a decree absolute immediately. There used to be > "voidable" marriages where a decree nisi was granted, but they were > abolished in 1981, by the Family Law Act. You may come across one > occasionally, but they were rare. > > Doug. > > Phil Doherty wrote: > >> She married in 1899. >> Please what do you mean by "draw a conclusion of law"? >> Philomena >> >> >> >> >> "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message >> news:[email protected] >>> It occurred to me afterwards: if she wanted to remarry, having a piece >>> of >>> paper getting rid of her existing marriage is easier than asking the >>> celebrant to draw a conclusion of law. >>> >>> Doug. >>> >>> Phil Doherty wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you Doug for that clear answer. >>>> Philomena >>>> >>>> >>>> "Doug Laidlaw" <[email protected]> wrote in message >>>> news:[email protected] >>>>> Phil Doherty wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Could someone please help with a question re Divorce ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Would a lady need to apply for a divorce if her husband had committed >>>>>> bigamy?. >>>>>> Family history says it was a bigamous marriage.If it was were they >>>>>> married >>>>>> in the eyes of the law >>>>>> >>>>>> Yesterday looking on Trove I notice she petitioned on the grounds of >>>>>> desertion and >>>>>> adultery . And was granted a decree nisi with cost. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you in anticipation of a reply >>>>>> Philomena >>>>> >>>>> A bigamous marriage is a nullity. The lady would not need to apply >>>>> for >>>>> a >>>>> divorce, but she would have been wise to get a decree of nullity >>>>> before >>>>> remarrying, just in case husband's first marriage was invalid. Then >>>>> the impediment to the second marriage disappears, and she is hitched >>>>> after all. >>>>> >>>>> If she applied for nullity and divorce at the same time, they deal >>>>> with >>>>> the >>>>> nullity first. If there is no valid marriage, it doesn't need to be >>>>> dissolved. But if she applied for divorce only, the validity of the >>>>> marriage would have been assumed. >>>>> >>>>> HTH, >>>>> >>>>> Doug. >>> >