The Supreme Court dismissed the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform’s appeal in a case brought by Abdi Jama Hassan and Safiya Saeed, according to concurring observations by Murray J.
Murray J. said he agreed with Fennelly J. that the appeal should be dismissed for the reasons set out in the concluding paragraph of Fennelly J.’s judgment. That judgment and the grounds it gave are not included in the supplied source, so the basis for the dismissal cannot be described further here.
The observations address the question of common-law marriage, but Murray J. stressed that Fennelly J.’s consideration of the concept and of when such a marriage might be recognised as valid was obiter: it was not needed to decide the appeal. Murray J. likewise said that a decision on the issue was unnecessary in this case.
Murray J. added that he would find it difficult to envisage a ceremony performed in Somalia, where, he said, common law has no application, being sufficient in itself to establish a common-law marriage. He said that if recognition of a common-law marriage arose for decision in Ireland, the relevant common-law principles would have to be identified and applied subject to Irish statute law and the Constitution. Those questions, he said, would fall to be decided in a future case where they arose for decision.
The supplied page records the appeal’s dismissal and Murray J.’s concurring observations. It does not include the Supreme Court’s operative order or the full reasons given by Fennelly J.