The High Court has affirmed the Circuit Court’s refusal to grant a decree of nullity to A. B., finding that the evidence did not establish either a lack of informed consent or that N. C. was incapable of sustaining a lifelong relationship when they married.
The appeal concerned a marriage ceremony in July 2003. A. B. sought an inquiry into both parties’ consent and whether N. C.’s state of mind, mental condition, personality disorder or emotional development made him incapable of forming and sustaining a normal lifelong relationship. The Circuit Court refused nullity on 22 April 2005, and A. B. appealed. The High Court heard the appeal on 6 February 2006.
The couple had lived together for several years and had a daughter. They separated after a dispute in January 2004, following which A. B. said N. C. told her he had feelings for men and had married hoping those feelings would disappear. N. C. denied having that conversation as she described it. The High Court judge accepted his evidence that, when he married, he did not consider his sexual orientation an issue and had married in good faith.
The judge said A. B.’s recollection of the conversation was not reliable enough to establish what N. C. believed at the time of the marriage. Both had been drinking and were upset. The court concluded that N. C. had not knowingly concealed a circumstance of substance that would have affected A. B.’s consent.
The court also considered a medical report and evidence from Dr. D., appointed to examine both parties. The judge found the material unsatisfactory, including because it did not adequately address N. C.’s contention that he was bisexual, his sexual history before the marriage, or his relationships after the couple separated. The judge could not conclude from the evidence whether N. C. was homosexual rather than bisexual, and found no sufficient basis to decide that his orientation rendered him unable to sustain a lasting relationship.
The High Court therefore held that it had not been shown that A. B. lacked full, free and informed consent, or that N. C. was incapable of forming and sustaining a lifelong relationship at the date of the ceremony. It refused a decree of nullity and affirmed the Circuit Court order. The ruling left the marriage valid in the court’s determination.