◀ Once more ▶
Within the case of divorced {couples}, even when they filed a lawsuit to invalidate the wedding itself, the courtroom didn’t even hearken to it.
The explanation was that there was no authorized profit to invalidating a wedding whereas it was already over.
The Supreme Courtroom at this time overturned a 40-year-old precedent.
Journalist Cho Hee-won explains what this implies.
◀ Report ▶
Mr. Kim, whose marriage dissolved after three years.
After divorcing my husband, I filed a lawsuit looking for annulment of the wedding.
“This was a wedding that occurred and not using a actual settlement in a state of utmost confusion and uncertainty,” he stated.
The courts of first and second occasion didn’t settle for the case itself.
At present, the Supreme Courtroom unanimously determined that it was needed to contemplate Mr. Kim’s request in a unanimous 13-member choice and despatched the case again to the Seoul Household Courtroom.
This overturned a precedent that had existed for 40 years.
[조희대/대법원장]
″It’s the unanimous opinion of the Supreme Courtroom that the curiosity in requesting the declaration of the nullity of the wedding is acknowledged even after the conjugal relationship has already been dissolved.″
In 1984 the Supreme Courtroom dominated that “there is no such thing as a authorized benefit in invalidating the wedding of a divorced couple.”
Though a swimsuit for annulment was filed as dishonorable as a result of the divorce was recorded within the household register, it was not even heard.
Civil regulation can invalidate a wedding within the absence of an actual settlement, however there’s an exception for divorced {couples}.
Nevertheless, the Supreme Courtroom at this time cleared the way in which for divorced {couples} to have their marriages declared null and void.
He defined that provided that a wedding may be annulled can a number of authorized disputes be resolved without delay.
Which means that you might be fully free from social safety disputes after divorce or from joint legal responsibility for money owed incurred through the marriage.
We reside in an period the place greater than 90,000 {couples} divorce yearly.
Current Supreme Courtroom precedent excluding divorced {couples} from marriage annulment instances has been criticized by lecturers.
This sentence is important because the Courtroom has taken a step ahead to guard folks’s rights.
I am Jo Hee-won from MBC Information.
Video Protection: Kim Gyeong-rak / Video Modifying: Park Byeong-geun
#Marriage #annulled #occasion #divorce #precedent #damaged #years
