family law Resources

The resources below are supplied by Law Teacher to help you with your studies.


This page is no longer updated, and no responsibility is accepted for it by St. Brendan's College or LawTeach

A mistake as to the identity of the other party is generally sufficient to make a marriage voidable, but a mistake as to his attributes, or as to the effect of the marriage, is not.

C v C [1942] NZLR 356, Callan J (New Zealand)
A woman P met a man R who claimed to be Michael Miller, a well-known boxer. She married him after a short courtship, but subsequently found he was not Miller at all and sought an annulment. Her petition was dismissed: the judge said P was mistaken as to R's attributes rather than his identity. She intended to marry the man R standing beside her, and was mistaken only as to his name and profession.

Re C & D (1979) 35 FLR 340, Bell J (Australia)
H was born a true hermaphrodite, with both male and female sexual organs; s/he was brought up as a boy, and underwent surgery as a young adult to remove the external signs of femininity. He married a woman W, but the marriage was never consummated and after a year W filed for nullity. Granting a declaration of nullity, the judge said W had intended to marry a male and was therefore mistaken as to the identity of her partner; that would be sufficient grounds. (Also, since marriage requires the participation of one man and one woman, H did not have the capacity to enter a valid marriage.)

Militante v Ogunwomoju [1994] Fam Law 17, Judge Owen
A woman P married a man calling himself Richard Ogunwomoju; he was actually an illegal immigrant and this was not his real name. When R was discovered and deported, P sought a decree of nullity, and this was granted. [This first-instance decision has been doubted by commentators: P's mistake was as to the man's attributes - his name and residential status - rather than his identity, and C v C above is thought to represent English as well as New Zealand law on the point.]

Valier v Valier (1925) 133 LT 830, Lord Merrivale P
An Italian P working in England met a woman R who took a fancy to him. She persuaded him to go through a register office wedding: P answered some simple questions in English (in which he was not fluent), signed his name, and gave R a ring which had just been given to him. Only afterwards did P learn that this was a marriage ceremony, and he subsequently sought an annulment. The judge granted his petition: there was evidence that an Italian marriage involves much more formality, and is often preceded by a public betrothal. P's claim that he was mistaken as to the nature of the ceremony could well be true.