The Assizes
| Published date | 01 July 1949 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201834901300302 |
| Date | 01 July 1949 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
The Assizes
BELIEF
OF
INVALIDITY
OF
FIRST
MARRIAGE
AS A
DEFENCE
ON
BIGAMY
CHARGE
R. v. Dolman
IT is useful to have areport of
the
decision of Streatfeild
J. in R. v. Dolman (1949, 1
All
E.R.
813)
at
Leeds
Assizes on a point in
the
law of bigamy on which there has
not
been uniformity of decision among
trial
judges. The
Court of Criminal Appeal in R. v. Wheat &Stocks (1921, 2
K.B.
119) ruled
that
it
is
not
a defence to a charge of
bigamy for
the
accused
to
prove
that
he
had
mistakenly
believed
that
he
had
been divorced from his first wife.
In
an earlier case, R. v. Thomson (70
J.P.
6),
the
common
serjeant
had
directed
the
jury
that
abona fide belief by
the
accused
that,
contrary
to
the
facts, his first spouse
was already married when he married her is a defence
and
in R. v. Wheat &Stocks
the
Court observed
that
R. v.
Thomson was inconsistent with
the
tenor of their judgment.
This observation was, of course, obiter
but
it
has been
acted on
by
some
trial
judges who have directed
the
jury
that
the
belief in question was no defence.
In
R. v. Dolman,
however, Streatfeild J. took
the
view
that
it
is a good
defence
if
the
accused
can
prove
that
at
the
time of
the
second marriage, which is
the
subject of
the
charge, he
had
reasonable cause to believe,
and
honestly believed,
that
his first marriage was void on
the
ground
that
the
woman he
then
married was already married to another
man.
In
this case
the
accused gave evidence to
the
effect
that
his first wife had, subsequently to
the
marriage,
admitted
to him
that
she was already married when she
married him
and
that
she
had
produced to him
what
appeared to be a genuine marriage certificate, showing
that
she
had
married
the
man
named
at
aparticular church.
256
To continue reading
Request your trial