Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Canada, both bigamy (article 290 of the Criminal code of Canada) [147]) and de facto polygamy (article 293 of the Criminal Code) [148] are illegal, but there are provisions in the property law of at least the Canadian province of Saskatchewan that consider the possibility of de facto multiple marriage-like situations (e.g. if an already ...
Termination of marriage in Canada is covered by the federal Divorce Act. [29] A divorce may be granted for one of the following reasons: the marriage has irretrievably broken down, and the two parties have been living apart for a year (s.8(2)(a) of the Act) one party has committed adultery (s.8(2)(b)(i) of the Act)
Today, polygamy is illegal in Mexico and its consequences are outlined in the 16th Title of the 2nd Volume of the Federal Penal Code, called "Against Civil Status and Bigamy" under Article 279. The marriage of more than one partner can result in up to a five year sentence in federal prison. [17]
In Canada, family law is primarily statute-based. The federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over marriage and divorce under section 91(26) of the Constitution Act, 1867. The main piece of federal legislation governing the issues arising upon married spouses’ separation and the requirements for divorce is the Divorce Act.
Hyde v. Hyde (1866) {L.R.} 1 P. & D. 130 — established the modern understanding and legal definition of marriage; Bethell v. Hillyard (1885) 38 Ch.D. 220. [1885 B. 2119.] — a potentially polygamous marriage is void; R v Smith 1994 15 Cr App R (S) 407 — used divorce papers to marry again [7]
Federal criminal code law against polygamy prohibits family court recognition or sanctioning of any form of subsequent marriage(s) whilst one or both persons are married to another person. [ 7 ] Nevertheless, it is important to note that section 29 applies only to the provisions of Part III of the law, which deals with spousal support, child ...
The court ultimately found that the territory in which he lived with Suzanne had been under native self-rule and therefore not bound to English law and proper registration of marriage would not have been necessary to establish a marriage, but that the native tribes had no marriage ceremonies, and the couple appeared to have "lived exactly as ...
Breakdown of the marriage was specified as the sole ground for divorce, as evidenced by the spouses living separate and apart for the one year prior to the divorce proceedings (and being so at the date of their commencement), or by having committed adultery, or physical or mental cruelty, at any time since the celebration of the marriage.