Hirani v Hirani
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE ORMROD,LORD JUSTICE WATKINS,MR. JUSTICE FRENCH |
| Judgment Date | 05 May 1982 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1982] EWCA Civ J0505-2 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | 82/0187 |
| Date | 05 May 1982 |
[1982] EWCA Civ J0505-2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL
ON APPEAL FROM THE DIVORCE REGISTRY
(His Honour Judge Roger Willis)
Royal Courts of Justice
Lord Justice Ormrod
Lord Justice Watkins
and
Mr. Justice French
82/0187
133348 1981
MR. JOHN FOX (instructed by Messrs Jack Bernstein & Co., solicitors, London) appeared on behalf of the Appellant (Petitioner).
THE RESPONDENT did not appear and was not represented.
This is an appeal by a wife petitioner from a judgment of His Honour Judge Roger Willis on 11th February 1982 sitting in the Family Division. He had before him an undefended petition by the wife for a decree of nullity on the ground that she had entered into the marriage under duress, the duress being exerted by her parents. Although it was an undefended suit the learned judge rejected the petition and dismissed it. The wife now appeals.
The brief facts are these. At the time the wife was 19 years of age, living with her parents in England. They are Indian Hindus. She made the acquaintance of a young Indian, Mr. Hussain, who is a Muslim. Her parents were very upset when they discovered this and naturally objected to her association with this man. According to Mrs. Hirani's evidence, which the learned judge accepted, her parents immediately made arrangements for her to marry Mr. Hirani. That was in early January 1981. Her evidence went on to say that she had never seen Mr. Hirani, nor indeed had her parents ever seen Mr. Hirani, but, within a fortnight of that first conversation, they had arranged for her to marry Mr. Hirani at a registry office on 17th January. They put great pressure on her to go through with this ceremony, the threat being: "You want to marry somebody who is strictly against our religion; he is a Muslim, you are a Hindu; you had better marry somebody we want you to, otherwise pack up your belongings and go. If you do not want to marry Mr. Hirani and you want to marry Mr. Hussain, go." Of course, she had no place to go and no means of supporting herself at that age and in those circumstances if she did leave the family home, and so, in spite of her opposition, she was forced to go through with the civil ceremony and after that she returned to her parents. She did not go to live with her husband until after the subsequent religious ceremony which took place on 27th February. She said that she was crying all the way through it and was utterly miserable, but after that ceremony she did live with Mr. Hirani for six weeks. After that she left and went to Mr. Hussain. She has never been back and there was no sexual intercourse between her and Mr. Hirani during that six weeks.
On that evidence Mr. Fox invited the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
- Re P (Forced Marriage)
-
N. (Otherwise K.) v K
...20.6.73 CONSTITUTION ART 41 CONSTITUTION ART 41.3 DPP (NI) V LYNCH 1975 AC 653 GRIFFITH V GRIFFITH 1944 IR 35 HIRAMI V HIRAMI 1983 4 FLR 232 K (ORSE MCC) V MCC 1982 ILRM 277 K V K UNREP O'KEEFFE 16.2.71 MARRIAGE ACT 1972 MATRIMONIAL CAUSES & MARRIAGE LAW (IRL) (AMDT) ACT 1870 S13 MCK V ......
-
E(C) v E(B)
...(3) H v. H, [1954] P. 258; [1953] 3 W.L.R. 849; [1953] 2 All E.R. 1229, dicta of Karminski J. considered. (4) Hirani v. HiraniFLR(1983), 4 FLR 232, applied. (5) NS v. MI, [2007] 1 FLR 444; [2007] 2 F.C.R. 748; [2006] EWHC 1646 (Fam), considered. (6) Occidental Worldwide Inv. Corp. v. Skibs ......
- SH v NB (Marriage: Consent)
-
Nullity
...Small BB 1990 HC 33. In this case, duress was raised as a subsidiary point to the main issue of mental capacity.55. (1886) 12 PD 21.56. (1983) 4 FLR 232.57. [1970] 3 All ER 905.58. BB 1990 HC 33.59. [1967] 2 All ER Nullity 49sufcient 60 or does it have to be an immediate threat to life, li......
-
Without consent: forced marriage in Australia.
...Session, UN GAOR, 47th sess, UN Doc A/47/38 (1992) [11]. (14) Szechter v Szechter [1971] P 286, 297-8 (Simon P). (15) Hirani v Hirani (1983) 4 FLR 232. See also SHv NB [2010] 1 FLR (16) Singh v Singh [1971] P 226; Hirani v Hirani (1983) 4 FLR 232; Mahmood v Mahmood [1993] SLT 589; Re SK [20......
-
UK Initiatives on Forced Marriage: Regulation, Dialogue and Exit
...Street, London WC2A2AE, UK; email: m.dustin@lse.ac.ukAppendix: CasesAv. J (Nullity Proceedings) [1989] 1 FRR 110Hirani v. Hirani [1983] 4 FLR 232Mahmood v. Mahmood [1993] SLT 589Mahmud v. Mahmud [1994] SLT 599 548 ANNE PHILLIPS AND MOIRA DUSTINRv. Ahmed Shah Moied and Others [1986] 8 Cr. Ap......