Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Dec 1996

Vol. 473 No. 2

Adjournment Debate. - Registration of Marriage.

Dr. O'Hanlon

The Minister knows the name of the couple involved. This matter refers to a couple who, three and a half months before they got married, notified the registrar for marriages in the county in which they reside of their intention to get married and got a receipt from the registrar stating that matters were in order. When the certificate of registration was sent to the registrar of marriages in another county following their marriage, he said that as he had not been notified of the marriage he could not register it. Therefore, the marriage is invalid in the eyes of the State. The couple notified the registrar, an agent of the registrar-general. They received the receipt from him confirming that everything was in order. It is not unreasonable that people would expect the registrar in the county in which they live would deal with their case. The couple were surprised to learn they should have notified the registrar in another county and because they did not do so their marriage was invalid.

I tabled a question on this matter to the Minister for Health yesterday and he pointed out that there were similar cases and that he was in consultation with the Minister for Equality and Law Reform and the registrar-general to see how they might regularise the matter.

Section 32(5) of the Family Law Act, 1995 states that the registrar means the registrar of marriages for the district concerned appointed under the Marriages Ireland Act, 1844 and the Registration of Marriages Ireland Act, 1863. It appears that the Minister does not have any great discretion to regularise the position without amending the legislation.

I am concerned that the couple have found their marriage was invalid through no fault of theirs. They notified the registrar and got a receipt from him. I am also concerned about the delay by the Minister in taking action. This could have extremely serious consequences for this couple and others who find themselves in a similar position. I need not go into the consequences to which this could give rise if this is allowed continue. The Minister should treat this as urgent. The marriage of this couple took place in Church in September and there has been ample time to deal with the issue.

If the law requires amendment, the Minister should do so retrospectively as a matter of urgency to cover the couples affected by the anomaly. If the matter can be resolved without amending the law, I appeal to the Minister to do so in the next day or two. If he were to tell this couple, or any other couple in a similar position, that their marriage which they believed was valid is valid, that would be the best Christmas present they could get.

Minister for Enterprise and Employment (Mr. R. Bruton)

I thank Deputy O'Hanlon for raising this matter.

The Family Law Act, 1995 which came into effect on 1 August 1996 contains new statutory provisions relating to marriage. Under section 32 of that Act there is a requirement on the parties to a marriage to notify the registrar of marriages for the district concerned of their intention to marry not less than three months prior to the date on which the marriage is to be solemnised. The effect of section 32 of the Act of 1995 is that unless special exemption has been obtained in accordance with the Act, a marriage shall not be valid unless the parties have met the notice requirement.

The policy enshrined in this section derives from a considerable body of sources. It was recommended by the Oireachtas Committee on Marriage Breakdown in 1985. It formed part of the Government's Statement of Intentions with regard to marriage, separation and divorce in the run up to the 1986 divorce referendum and the merits were discussed in the Government's White Paper on Marital Breakdown in 1992. The provision now contained in the Family Law Act, 1995, which was before the Oireachtas for consideration in Bill form between February 1994 and its passing in September 1995, was welcomed by both sides of the House as a worthwhile measure to protect the institution of marriage. The provision was welcomed by various interest groups, including the churches, prior to the divorce referendum last year. In the Government's information campaign prior to the referendum the section was highlighted as one of the Government's measures to protect and support marriage.

I understand from my colleague the Minister for Health who has responsibility in relation to the Office of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages that a number of steps were taken by the office of the registrar-general to advise the general public, clergy and registrars of the new notification requirements under section 32 of the Act of 1995. Priority was given by the office to the production of information leaflets for couples intending to marry, celebrants and registrars. Necessary notification books together with written guidelines for their use were provided to registrars. This process began early in March 1996. Notices in relation to the new requirement appeared in all national papers on 19 April 1996 and in the subsequent days in the Sunday papers, 40 provincial papers and some magazines. In addition there were advertisement slots on RTE and commercial radio.

Since the introduction of the new procedures a number of circulars have been issued to registrars reminding them of the importance of the notification procedures and strict compliance with the guidelines. In addition, a number of training courses for registrars have been held and two more such courses are planned for January 1996.

I have been advised by the Minister for Health of difficulties which have arisen in the case referred to by the Deputy. I share the Minister's regret of the problems which seemed to have been caused for the couple involved. As indicated by the Minister in reply to Question No. 44 of 17 December, the administration of the registration system for marriages is primarily a matter for the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages and for local registrars who operate under his general direction. However, consultations are taking place between my Department and the Department of Health with a view to finding a solution which would deal with the difficulties which have arisen. Every effort is being made to find an early and satisfactory resolution to the problem involved. All avenues of approach are being considered and decision in the matter will be announced as quickly as possible.