This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
RICHARD FRIMSTON TEP IS A PARTNER AND HEAD OF THE PRIVATE CLIENT TEAM AT RUSSELL-COOKE LLP, AND CHAIR OF THE STEP EU COMMITTEE


GLOBAL NEWS AND VIEWS EU column


Could you recognise a South British couple?


Richard Frimston on same-sex marriage and domicile T


wo years ago, I fl agged up the issues of the eff ects of marriage on property rights, private international law and the proposed EU Regulation Rome IV.


In South Britain only, there is now the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill (HC Bill 126). There has been much discussion as to the eff ects on religious organisations, but nothing on the diffi cult private international law (PIL) issues involved. The Bill proposes that in England and Wales, marriage of a same-sex couple shall be lawful. While, personally, I support all measures of equality, I am concerned that the cross-border and EU issues arising from the current drafting have not been addressed. Some EU states, such as Spain and


Portugal, have not introduced registered partnerships at all. They permit marriage by both same- and mixed-sex couples and usually recognise a same-sex registered partnership as a marriage. Sweden and Norway have followed the Dutch example. Denmark (but not Greenland or the Faroes) also did so from 15 June 2012. The Republic of Ireland followed the UK and introduced civil partnerships on 1 January 2011, with a three-month registration period. The German and Dutch registered partnerships have exactly the same matrimonial property regimes as marriage. France is also debating same-sex marriage.


What are the PIL problems? There are no current EU Regulations dealing with the recognition of marriage or registered partnerships. The 1978 Hague Convention XXVI has been ratifi ed only by Australia, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. The rest of us, therefore, have our own confl icting PIL rules. For most EU


WWW.STEPJOURNAL.ORG


states, capacity to marry is governed by a citizen’s personal law. In the UK and the Republic of Ireland, that is the law of the domicile at the time of marriage. For most others, it will be the law of citizenship. In France, while it is not possible to


register a same-sex marriage, a foreign same-sex marriage is valid if valid in accordance with the law of the nationality of each party. A Dutch same-sex marriage is therefore valid in France if between two Dutch nationals, but not if between a Dutch national and a French national. In states that have introduced same- sex marriage, it is usually recognised as valid if one party is a national or if both are habitually resident in the state that permits same-sex marriage. It is Rome IV that has shown the main diff erences between registered partnerships and marriage. Since only some states have registered partnerships, the only law that can govern the partnership is that of the place of registration. The law governing the property eff ects of marriage, on the


other hand, is usually independent of the place of marriage and can be that of the common domicile, of nationality or of a common residence. Section 38 of the Family Law (Scotland)


Act makes it clear that the dual-domicile theory is in force in Scotland. The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill does not currently appear to deal with any of these issues. If passed in its current form, the eff ects would seem to be: • Same-sex marriage celebrated anywhere in the world will be recognised in South Britain as a valid marriage if each party is domiciled at the time of the marriage in a state that also recognises same-sex marriage, but not otherwise. Will this apply to marriages celebrated before the Bill is enacted? What will be the eff ect of a change of domicile in the interim? Such marriages will still be recognised as civil partnerships in Scotland and in Northern Ireland.


• Existing civil partnerships registered in South Britain could be converted to marriages, but only if each party is domiciled in a state that recognises same- sex marriage. Civil partnerships registered outside South Britain (including overseas relationships, but not foreign same- sex marriages) cannot be converted to marriage, even if celebrated between two people domiciled in South Britain.


Most of my clients haven’t got a clue what domicile means. If the registrar asks where a bride or groom is domiciled, and the answer is Scotland or Poland, what is the registrar to do? Proceed with a marriage that may not be valid or tell them to come back later? Now that almost 40 per cent of people in London were born outside the UK, isn’t it time for the UK to ditch domicile and use habitual residence as the personal connecting factor?


There is no sign that these issues are


going to be resolved any time soon. PIL is ignored at one’s peril.


APRIL 2013 17


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84