header-logo header-logo

01 March 2023
Issue: 8015 / Categories: Legal News , Family
printer mail-detail

Weddings outlawed for those below age of majority

The minimum age for marriage rose to 18 this week, as the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) Act 2022 came into force.

The Act makes it a criminal offence for a person to aid, abet or encourage any child under 18 to enter into any form of marriage, and a criminal offence for a responsible person such as a parent or guardian to fail to protect a child from entering into any form of marriage. The offences are punishable by up to seven years in prison.

The law applies to religious and cultural marriages in England and Wales, as well as those registered with the local authority. The law in Scotland, where the minimum age is 16 and no parental consent is required, and in Northern Ireland, where 16- and 17-year-olds can marry with parental consent, remain unaffected.

Nicky Hunter, partner at Stowe Family Law, said the reform ‘finally ended the archaic law in England and Wales that has allowed children aged 16 and 17 to be married, with the consent of their parents, even though they are legally considered to be children.

‘The Marriage Act 1949, which was in place up until [this week], legitimised child marriage in England and Wales. The mechanism of parental consent which existed under this law, whilst originally intended to be a safeguard against child marriage has, in reality, proved in many cases to be a vehicle for parental abuse.

‘Campaigners have long argued that the existing law has allowed children between the ages of 16-18 to be coerced into marriage without their consent and against their best interests, pointing to many cases where young people have been subjected to domestic abuse, some suffering lifelong harms, as well as losing opportunities for education, employments and personal growth and independence.’

Deborah Jeff, partner at Simkins, said: ‘It was high time that the law called out this abuse of children, shutting down this form of manipulation of forced marriage under the heading of “consent” of a parent. Of even greater significance is that it captures all forms of "marriage" even those not recognised by the law as being such.’

Issue: 8015 / Categories: Legal News , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll