Islamic faith marriages not valid in English law, appeal court rules

[KungFuLee]

yes I read...I just added on WITH REFERENCES rather than just say xyz

well.....you should refer to government website if you are seeking or clarifying this kind of information, I studied law in Hong Kong, (although I never attempted the Bar) but I can tell you most of these "Help Site" you quote don't know what they are talking about most of the time as they are community based advice. And they don't require to..

 

[Dubious]

well.....you should refer to government website if you are seeking or clarifying this kind of information, I studied law in Hong Kong, (although I never attempted the Bar) but I can tell you most of these "Help Site" you quote don't know what they are talking about most of the time as they are community based advice. And they don't require to..

Can you point out what wrong information that website shared?

This is not a "I know more than you" competition. I used certain sites that provide information and simplify laws for the layman!

2ndly the topic is not about civil partnership laws...THAT was just answering to a member who raised it

 

[KungFuLee]

Can you point out what wrong information that website shared?

This is not a "I know more than you" competition. I used certain sites that provide information and simplify laws for the layman!

2ndly the topic is not about civil partnership laws...THAT was just answering to a member who raised it

I don't understand, do you want me to point to things that are different or do you want me to let it go because this is not the topic is about?

CAB in UK is staffed by volunteer solicitors (lawyers) and run by local governments

I did not mean "all" of them or specifically the CAB website are wrong all the time, I just put a general statement out. There are good reference out there as much as bad reference. And people tend to believe non-official source which usually come back and bite them in the arse.

For example. The https://www.step.org/sites/default/files/Publications/cohabiting-couples-legal-rights-uk2.pdf

Under Rights for cohabiting couples – England & Wales It said

No tax reliefs and exemptions that spouses and civil partners enjoy, including pensions

However, in https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/tax-credits-calculator/#/partner under tax credit

You have to make a joint claim with your partner if you are married, in a civil partnership, or live together

So which one you should believe?

 

[Dubious]

I don't understand, do you want me to point to things that are different or do you want me to let it go because this is not the topic is about?

as you wish! I only pointed out what you did and what I was replying to

 

[Dubious]

You have to make a joint claim

I think you know there is a difference between you can make a claim and this depends on your situation...It follows a list of questions....and if your case doesnt fall within the lawful entitlement to claim you wont get the claim...

No tax reliefs and exemptions that spouses and civil partners enjoy, including pensions

Under existing law, married and unmarried couples are usually treated differently for tax purposes. Husbands and wives can transfer assets between themselves generally on a tax free basis unlike unmarried couples. Basically tax recognises marriage in a way that does not apply to cohabitation, and this feeds through into the tax treatment of the two entities, both in terms of reliefs/exemptions and in terms of anti-avoidance and other restrictions.

https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/tax-credits-calculator/#/result

both. it is complicated, to explain it, it will take me pages of typing then some trolls will come along and bury all that work under a 100 nonsensical posts, so let's agree to disagree and move on

https://www.gov.uk/browse/benefits/tax-credits

He didnt do his homework and hence the confusion!

but I can tell you most of these "Help Site" you quote don't know what they are talking about most of the time as they are community based advice. And they don't require to..

I dont think so you can generalize like that ...ESP when you have no idea of the law in question!

 

[El Sidd]

Basically tax recognises marriage in a way that does not apply to cohabitation, and this feeds through into the tax treatment of the two entities, both in terms of reliefs/exemptions and in terms of anti-avoidance and other restrictions.

What if the cohabiting couple take out massive loans as some sort of a business venture?

That could give them the tax breaks somehow they need to get equal rights.

When will the single person enjoy tax breaks? Why the institution of marriage being imposed by the government?

Is it because God saved the Queen who was married and let the single peasants die off?

Why this kolaveri di?

 

[Dubious]

What if the cohabiting couple take out massive loans as some sort of a business venture?

That could give them the tax breaks somehow they need to get equal rights.

I dont know maybe they have a limit on how much loans one can take out esp when they cant guarantee they will be together to be able to pay the loans...

For Belgium:

As far as the tax authorities are concerned, you and your partner are two separate people. Even if you have a cohabitation contract drawn up, you both fill in a separate tax return. If you have one or more children together, you specify which of you will take responsibility for the children.

Debts
As a married or officially cohabiting couple, you are jointly responsible for any debts. Even if your partner has created them. On the other hand, unofficially cohabiting couples enjoy more freedom in this area.


https://www.kbc.be/retail/en/family/marriage-or-official-or-unofficial-cohabitation.html

For UK:
https://www.choose.co.uk/guide/financial-rights-for-unmarried-couples.html

For Ireland:
https://www.revenue.ie/en/life-even.../marital-status/cohabiting-couples/index.aspx

 

[El Sidd]

I dont know maybe they have a limit on how much loans one can take out esp when they cant guarantee they will be together to be able to pay the loans...

For Belgium:

As far as the tax authorities are concerned, you and your partner are two separate people. Even if you have a cohabitation contract drawn up, you both fill in a separate tax return. If you have one or more children together, you specify which of you will take responsibility for the children.

Debts
As a married or officially cohabiting couple, you are jointly responsible for any debts. Even if your partner has created them. On the other hand, unofficially cohabiting couples enjoy more freedom in this area.


https://www.kbc.be/retail/en/family/marriage-or-official-or-unofficial-cohabitation.html

For UK:
https://www.choose.co.uk/guide/financial-rights-for-unmarried-couples.html

For Ireland:
https://www.revenue.ie/en/life-even.../marital-status/cohabiting-couples/index.aspx

well i can tell you muslim men ain't gonna complain so good luck

 

[KungFuLee]

as you wish! I only pointed out what you did and what I was replying to

Well, then I guess I should answer them

I think you know there is a difference between you can make a claim and this depends on your situation...It follows a list of questions....and if your case doesnt fall within the lawful entitlement to claim you wont get the claim...

The thing is, entitlement are not usually related to relationship status, there are a few different category. Children, Disability, Donation and Society Security, it was basically listed in the first paragraph in this page

https://www.gov.uk/how-tax-credits-affect-other-benefits

Now, whether or not if you entitle to a benefit is one thing, the "requirement" of seeing what a relationship status is another, in most part of the world, relationship status only affect one thing, your declaration. In effect, If I have a child, I do not have disability, and I do not collect social benefit, I should have a similar tax bracket whether I am married, co-dependent or live together.

Now, I am not saying this is the case, because I have not ever file a tax return and I am not trained in Tax Law in the UK, I can study it, but it's 6 am here, and I don't think It can go anywhere soon.

Under existing law, married and unmarried couples are usually treated differently for tax purposes. Husbands and wives can transfer assets between themselves generally on a tax free basis unlike unmarried couples. Basically tax recognises marriage in a way that does not apply to cohabitation, and this feeds through into the tax treatment of the two entities, both in terms of reliefs/exemptions and in terms of anti-avoidance and other restrictions.

https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/tax-credits-calculator/#/result

I would say the first page of the quote have said they aren't. Because they group the 3 different group together as joint claim. If they are different, why they were put into the same category?

He didnt do his homework and hence the confusion!

It's not a confusion, but rather a general statement. Most people look at these website and think they are getting the real answer, it's not about professional term versus layman term, but rather if you studied law, you would know most of these interpretation is from a few cases that they have been gone through, but that does not represent the whole situation.

And most of the time if you follow these "Help Site" you ended up getting into more trouble than you should be in for.

I dont think so you can generalize like that ...ESP when you have no idea of the law in question!

Lol, what law in question?

You are talking about a definition not a law. Legal requirement for getting Married is a law, what is marriage or co-habitant is not a law.

 

[Dubious]

The thing is, entitlement are not usually related to relationship status, there are a few different category. Children, Disability, Donation and Society Security, it was basically listed in the first paragraph in this page

And hence why I quoted the page for those who are interested to read further...

It's not a confusion, but rather a general statement. Most people look at these website and think they are getting the real answer, it's not about professional term versus layman term, but rather if you studied law, you would know most of these interpretation is from a few cases that they have been gone through, but that does not represent the whole situation.

And most of the time if you follow these "Help Site" you ended up getting into more trouble than you should be in for.

SOME of these help sites are run by solicitors...Which is a different story altogether...THOSE REALLY INTERESTED do consult lawyers...otherwise it is for a basic read. If you have anything else to add be my guest but please be respectful and not obnoxious coz no one likes anything coming out of obnoxious behavior!

@Ghareeb_Da_Baal is our resident lawyer though probably not in civil cases...

 

[BATMAN]

Islamic faith marriages not valid in English law, appeal court rules

Harriet Sherwood

14 Feb 2020

Islamic faith marriages are not valid under English law, the court of appeal has ruled, in a blow to thousands of Muslim women who have no rights when it comes to divorce.

The judgment, delivered on Friday, overturned an earlier high court ruling that an Islamic marriage, known as a nikah, fell within the scope of English matrimonial law.

The appeal court has confirmed that nikah marriages are legally “non-marriages”, meaning spouses have no redress to the courts for a division of matrimonial assets such as the family home and spouse’s pension if a marriage breaks down.

Many couples who undergo nikah ceremonies believe they are lawfully married. But their marriages are only legal if they additionally go through a civil ceremony.

A survey in 2017 found nearly all married Muslim women in the UK had had a nikah and almost two-thirds had not had a separate civil ceremony.

Responding to the appeal court judgment, Charles Hale QC, of the family law firm 4PB, said: “This means that many have absolutely no rights at the end of what they believe to be their ‘marriage’. No rights to assets in the husband’s sole name, and no rights to maintenance.”

The appeal court had “upheld the existing concepts of what constitutes a lawful marriage … The law in these cases is not keeping up with society. These vulnerable women need better protection than the law currently provides.”

The 2018 high court case concerned a couple, Nasreen Akhter and Mohammed Shabaz Khan, who had undergone a nikah marriage conducted by an imam in front of 150 guests at a restaurant in Southall, west London, in 1998.

The relationship had broken down, and Akhter petitioned for divorce. But Khan blocked the move, arguing the couple were not married under English law, only under sharia or Islamic law.

Akhter said she had seen Khan as her husband, and he had “always introduced me as his wife”.

The high court heard the couple had intended to follow their nikah ceremony with a civil ceremony, but that Khan refused to go through with a legal process despite frequent efforts by Akhter to persuade him.

Mr Justice Williams, who heard the case in the family division of the high court in London, concluded the marriage fell within the scope of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.

Under the law, there are three categories of marriage: valid, void and non-marriage. Valid marriages may be ended by a decree of divorce; void marriages may be ended by a decree of nullity; non-marriages cannot be legally ended because legally the marriage never existed.

The high court ruled the Akhter-Khan marriage had been “entered into in disregard of certain requirements as to the formation of marriage. It is therefore a void marriage and the wife is entitled to a decree of nullity”.

An appeal against the high court ruling was brought by the attorney general.

Three family judges sitting in the court of appeal concluded that to uphold the high court’s ruling “would gravely diminish the value of the system of registration of marriages upon which so much depends in a modern community”. It added: “It is not difficult for parties who want to be legally married to achieve that status.”

The state did not have a human rights obligation to recognise religious marriage, the judgment said.

Daniel Jones, of the law firm BLM, said the appeal court judgment was “a real blow for all concerned”.

He added: “The decision … will leave Muslim women in the UK in legal limbo, compelled to turn to sharia councils to pursue Islamic divorce. This often involves lengthy delays and does not afford women the same financial protections as would be granted if their ceremonies were recognised as a marriage under English law.

“This matter is of fundamental importance to Muslim women across the UK … leaving many women at great financial risk in unhappy relationships.”

Anna-Laura Lock, a senior associate at the law firm Winckworth Sherwood, said: “Given the current law on marriage leaves parties to a religious ceremony so exposed financially following relationship breakdown, this will not be the end of the road for this issue. A change in the law is long overdue and must surely be on the horizon.”

The law on marriage was “no longer fit for purpose in a modern, multicultural and less religious society”, she added.

Pragna Patel of Southall Black Sisters, an organisation that has campaigned on the issue of nikah marriages, said: “Today’s judgment will force Muslim and other women to turn to sharia ‘courts’, which already cause significant harm to women and children, for remedies because they are now locked out of the civil justice system.

“What we are seeing is the outsourcing of justice on family matters to unaccountable and fundamentalist-inspired community-based systems of religious arbitration. This is not about recognising religious marriages; it is about the state guaranteeing equality to all before the law.”

In 2018, an independent review of sharia councils recommended that Muslim couples should undergo a civil marriage as well as a religious ceremony to give women protection under the law.

The review, instigated by Theresa May in 2016 when she was home secretary, found that a significant number of Muslim couples did not register their marriages under civil law, and “some Muslim women have no option of obtaining a civil divorce”.

Raghad Altikriti, president of the Muslim Association of Britain, said many Islamic centres in the UK had made civil registration a condition of nikah marriage. The appeal court ruling provided an “opportunity to continue the discussion to ensure that everyone’s rights are protected by facilitating a comprehensive system that incorporates the needs of all”, she added.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...s-not-valid-in-english-law-appeal-court-rules

i can see why RAW is upset, but how exactly marriage is not valid?

 

[Gripen9]

Yes. I got married in Chicago..I had to get a marriage license prior to getting married. Then I gave it to our Imam who was also an authorized marriage officiator. He filled out both marriage license and nikah nama. He also entered our marriage in the local.county board.

 

[KungFuLee]

And hence why I quoted the page for those who are interested to read further...

Then why you said I am wrong and confused? I mean. If we are talking about the same thing.

SOME of these help sites are run by solicitors...Which is a different story altogether...THOSE REALLY INTERESTED do consult lawyers...otherwise it is for a basic read. If you have anything else to add be my guest but please be respectful and not obnoxious coz no one likes anything coming out of obnoxious behavior!

@Ghareeb_Da_Baal is our resident lawyer though probably not in civil cases...

I have already said not all I said was bad, there are some that are really good, especially the one that refer to the government regulation instead of just listing what they think it is . But most of the time, people get burned because they are too trusting or believing those site. Although I have not had my Bar exam, I did have my legal internship done on a law firm, and my firm for 1 year was specialized in low/mid range traffic offence (Anything from low range drink driving, Negligence Driving occasioning GBH or Dangerous Driving) and I have seen my fair share of people come to our office believing some lame excuse (like epilepsy seizure or some basic structure failure) was excusable. And some of them actually have been found guilty in these offence because they try to use them after they saw it on the internet. That is why I said not entirely trust those Help Site and seek actual advice, wouldn't you agree on this general statement?

As I said, I am not a lawyer, I am in accounting/actuarial field so I have no interest in legal matter, we should just agree to disagree on the different condition.

 

[BATMAN]

@Dubious In central Europe same tax regime apply to co-habiting couples and married couples. It's just that they are independent with their personal assets.

Marriage in Islam is a civil contract, this can be registered by a notary but in Pakistan, due to preventing corruption endorsement of legal judge is required.