HL Deb 24 March 1986 vol 472 cc1253-68

9.18 p.m.

Read a third time.

Clause 1 [Marriage between certain persons related by affinity not to be void]:

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 1: Page 1, line 11, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, with your Lordships' permission I should also like to speak to Amendments Nos. 2, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27. They are all identical. These amendments relate to the minimum age for marriages between step-relations covered by this Bill and seek to increase the minimum age from 18 to 21. These amendments are brought forward in response to amendments moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, in the name of herself and the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, at Committee stage, which were withdrawn by the noble Baroness upon my undertaking to reconsider the matter.

There are many arguments either way relating to age limits. One is faced with the fact that all age limits in relation to marriage or anything else are arbitrary. I respect the unease expressed at Second Reading by the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, and echoed at the Committee stage by the noble Baroness, Lady Ewan-Biggs. I have considerable respect for the arguments for an age limit of 21 in this kind of marriage although to provide for it would bring such marriages, in a sense, out of line with the minimum age limits for other forms of marriage. But consistency is not everything. Lawyers thrive on inconsistencies, I am glad to say.

There are clear and cogent arguments that marriages of this kind will probably need greater maturity. The parties involved may have more to cope with than in an ordinary marriage. It is therefore thought desirable to introduce a minimum age of 21, which it is hoped provides a safeguard without being over-protective. In relation to step-relations—step-parents and stepchildren—the anxiety has always been to ensure that vulnerable young people should not be exposed to pressures within the family. Even if the younger partner has never been a child of the family within the meaning of the law it is thought that a minimum age limit of 21 will provide an added safeguard. I emphasise, as I emphasised at the Committee stage, that the intention is not to redefine the concept of "child of the family" also within the Bill. I beg to move.

The Lord Bishop of Ely

My Lords, perhaps I may speak very briefly to the amendments just proposed. As a Bishop who has followed the progress of the Bill of the noble Lord, Lord Meston, with close and sympathetic interest, may I say that as I understand it the Bishops would hope to see the Bill proceed whether or not amended in this particular. It is recognised that this amendment is designed to give a measure of protection to the young in the face of possible pressures in the family, but there is even so, on the part of the Bishops, who have been following the Bill most closely, an openness either way about the proposal to make the minimum age of marriage in such circumstances 21 rather than 18.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, I approach this group of amendments, and indeed all the amendments this evening, on a dual basis. The first is that all your Lordships who have been concerned in this Bill are agreed that it is worthwhile, although I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, would add "so far as it goes". The second is that this is really the last chance we have of getting the Bill right. Unless we are agreed this evening, the Bill, I should judge, will be lost for the Session. If it is going to pass this Session it can do so only on the basis of passing in the other place on the nod.

The first two amendments are a compromise. Amendment No. 1 stipulates that both parties shall be 21 at the time of marriage. Amendment No. 2 stipulates that the younger party has not been a child of the family in respect of the other party before the age of 18. At an earlier stage—I think it was the Report stage—the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, wanted the age of 21 for both. I myself wanted 18 for both as being the general age at which we accord responsibility and power of choice at large to young persons. 'This is a compromise. I am myself prepared to accept it. Unless we do so the Scottish amendment, Amendment No. 32, will be out of line, and so will the "in-law" amendments, Amendments Nos. 6 and 7, which I think in all sense ought to follow the same pattern as to age. I therefore readily accept this amendment as a compromise.

Lord Denning

My Lords, perhaps I may say how much I welcome this amendment. Twenty-one is a much more sensible age, as I have always thought, than 18. To bring this matter into line, and to get the Bill through, would be of the first value.

Baroness Ewart-Biggs

My Lords, I should like to say how grateful I am to the noble Lord, Lord Meston, for bringing forward these amendments, which go a long way to satisfying the request that my noble friend Lord Mishcon and I put forward in Committee.

We felt that it would be better if the age of the child of the family relationship was also changed to bring it up to 21 years. However, the noble Lord, Lord Meston, has made an important change. If one is 21 years of age, one is perhaps less susceptible to persuasion. It is a less volatile age. As it is a question of deciding whether or not to get married, it is important that the age should be moved from 18, which is not a very mature age judging by my experience of young people. We are most grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Meston, for making this amendment. I hope very much that it will receive a welcome from all parts of the House, including the Government Benches.

Viscount Davidson

My Lords, as the House must be well aware by now, the Government are neutral on the main aims of the Bill. It is for your Lordships to decide whether it is necessary and desirable that stepchildren and grand-stepchildren who have not lived as children of the family of their step-parents and grand step-parents should have to wait until they are 21 before marrying step-parents or grand step-parents.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords who have ventured to support the amendments. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon, said, this is indeed a last chance to get it right. I hope that this amendment does get it right. The noble and learned Lord is also correct in saying that it is a compromise. There is now, in a sense, a dual test. I was anxious to accommodate those who suggested 21 as the minimum age for the type of marriage in question, without redefining the concept of child of the family.

As to the future amendments, Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 will bring the limit of 21 years of age into line when the House comes to consider marriages as between in-laws. I commend this amendment to the House.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 2: Page 1, line 12, leave out ("that age") and insert ("the age of eighteen")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Baroness Seear moved Amendment No. 3: Page 1, line 15, leave out ("mother or")

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, with the leave of the House, I should like to speak also to Amendments Nos. 4 and 5. They are simply revisions of amendments that were moved at the Committee stage because of defective drafting at that stage. They do not in any sense alter the meaning of the amendments accepted in Committee. I beg to move.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, as the noble Baroness said, this is merely redrafting and does not alter the effect. I preferred the original version, which I thought was clear and more economical. However, I shall not oppose this redrafting, if only because Amendments Nos. 6 and 7, which are necessary to bring the in-law into line with the step relation, are dependent on the new draft of the noble Baroness. As I said, we have to get this right tonight or the Bill will not pass before the end of this Session. I support the amendment.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I, too, accept the amendments, both in principle and as they are drafted.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

9.30 p.m.

Baroness Seear moved Amendment No. 5: Page 1, line 17, leave out ("son or")

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Baroness Seear moved Amendment No. 5: Page 1, line 19, leave out from ("relationship") to end of line 21 and insert— ("( ) A marriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act between a man and a woman who is the mother of a former spouse of his shall not be void by reason only of that relationship if the marriage is solemnized after the death of both that spouse and the father of that spouse. ( ) A marriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act between a man and a woman who is a former spouse of his son shall not be void by reason only of that relationship if the marriage is solemnized after the death of both his son and the mother of his son.")

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.

Lord Meston moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 5, Amendment No. 6: Line 7, at end insert ("and after both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, with permission I shall also speak to Amendment No. 7. As I have indicated, this introduces a consistent minimum age for marriages as between in-laws. Again, the same arguments apply in relation to maturity, but in practice very rarely will the situation arise that either party will be anywhere near the age of 21. Nevertheless, it is helpful and sensible to have the same age limit for marriages to be permitted under this Bill which, of course, seeks to permit some marriages within the degrees of affinity. It gives some weight to the concern expressed by the minority in No Just Cause that the young in-law should be secure in his or her relationship within the new spouse's family. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment to the amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 5, Amendment No. 7: Line 12, at end insert ("and after both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment to the amendment agreed to.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 8: Page 2, line 2, leave out from ("has") to ("lived") in line 3.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I speak also to Amendment No. 28. The purpose of this amendment is to take out the words "for a period" in the part of the Bill which seeks to define the child of the family. That has been done in response to the request of the noble Viscount, Lord Davidson, on Report to reconsider the usefulness of the phrase "for a period" within that subsection. It has been accepted that those words do not add significantly to the definition of a child of the family and it is on that basis that I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom moved Amendment No. 9:

After Clause 1, insert the following new clause:

("Marriage between certain persons related by affinity—Scotland. 1977 c. 15.

. Schedule (Amendment of Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977) (which amends the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977 so as to permit—

  1. (a) the marriage of a man and a woman who is the grandmother of a former spouse of his or is a former spouse of his grandson;
    2. 1257
  2. (b) the marriage of a woman and a man who is the grandfather of a former spouse of hers or is a former spouse of her grand-daughter, and
  3. (c) under certain conditions, the marriage of persons related in certain other degrees of affinity)
shall have effect.".

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, on Report I gave notice of the Government's intention to extend the provisions of the Bill to Scotland; a decision taken on the basis of the consensus of support in your Lordships' House for the Bill and the practice of seeking to maintain consistency in the laws of marriage for Scotland, England and Wales.

The amendment in my name is intended, therefore, to apply the provisions of the Bill in a form approved by your Lordships to Scotland in terms of amendments to the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977. I wish to make it clear, like my noble friend, that in moving these amendments the Government do not depart in the least degree from their attitude of benevolent neutrality.

I speak also to Amendment No. 32, and these amendments bring into effect a new schedule to the Bill which amends the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977 so as to permit marriages between certain persons who are at present prohibited from marrying each other on account of relationship by affinity. Paragraphs (a) and (b) explain in detail the fact that marriage can now take place between grandparents-in-law and grandchildren-in-law and the Bill achieves this by substituting for paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to the 1977 Act two new paragraphs, paragraphs 2 and 2(a), and in so doing it deletes from the previously forbidden degrees of relationship for the purpose of marriage relationships between grandparents-in-law and grandchildren-in-law.

Paragraph (c) refers to marriages which may now take place subject to the conditions stipulated in the new schedule between step-parents and stepchildren and between parents-in-law and children-in-law. The schedule provides for Scotland therefore in a manner corresponding to what is proposed for England and Wales elsewhere in the Bill in amendments which have been and will be proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Meston, and the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, I think with the exception of Amendment No. 15. I beg to move.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, though I have learned a certain amount about Scottish law by listening to the debates on the Scottish legal aid Bill, and though the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate dealt with paragraph (c), I am afraid that I still do not understand what is within its ambit. I hope he will be able to give a slightly more full explanation to the following: under certain conditions, the marriage of persons related in certain other degrees of affinity shall have effect". I am not at all sure what that is really getting at.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom

My Lords, the important matter is to be found in the schedule to the Bill. There are circumstances in which certain conditions have to be satisfied before parties may marry. I am looking at the schedule itself in paragraph 2(c) where it is provided that after subsection (4)—this is subsection (4) of Section 2 of the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977—there shall be inserted the following new subsection: where the parties intending to marry are related in a degree specified in paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act, either party may apply to the Court of Session for a declaration that the conditions specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of Subsection (1A) above are fulfilled in relation to the intended marriage". That is in relation to the attainment of a certain age, which is 21, and that the younger party has not at any time before attaining the age of 18 lived in the same household.

These are the forms and conditions which have to be satisfied before there can be a marriage between persons related in certain other degrees of affinity.

I accept that it is rather a circumlocutory way of achieving an objective which may be achieved otherwise in the English legislation. But I can assure the noble and learned Lord that that is the intention of this subsection in relation to the schedule.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, I thank the noble and learned Lord for his explanation. It is not very easy to understand that new paragraph but I think it is now clear what the provision to which it refers intends.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I simply accept these amendments with gratitude and indeed I accept the explanation for the amendments given by the noble and learned Lord. Though my heart may be in the highlands, my knowledge of the law is firmly south of the Border. I thank the noble and learned Lord for these amendments which of course bring Scotland into line under this Bill. I should also like to thank those responsible for the extensive drafting involved.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 5 [Short title, citation, commencement and extent]:

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 10: Page 3, line 2, leave out ("and this Act and") and insert— ("( ) This Act so far as it extends to England and Wales may be cited with").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, if I may speak also to Amendment No. 11, these amendments simply effect alterations to the citation clause consequential upon the extension of this Bill to Scotland.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, I am not sure whether the noble Lord, Lord Meston, also spoke to Amendment No. 14 on which I had a question as to whether the words, "save as aforesaid this" were proper; in other words, whether sufficient of the Scottish provisions had been referred to.

I let the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate know of my misgivings—at a very late date I am afraid. The provision about which I was not sure was the subject matter of Amendment No. 12, which seemed Scottish, and in Clause 5(3).

Lord Meston

I hesitate to interrupt the noble and learned Lord, but I did not speak to Amendment No. 14. I did not do so deliberately because although on the Marshalled List Amendments Nos. 12, 13 and 14 appear in my name, in fact they should have appeared in the name of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Cameron, and I therefore disclaim all responsibility for Amendments Nos. 12, 13 and 14.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom

Perhaps I may say at this stage, just in response to something that the noble and learned Lord let drop, that he brought a certain matter to my attention. I will deal with this, if I may, in speaking to Amendment No. 14, because I think the noble and learned Lord has a point which I would hope perhaps the House might deal with even at this late stage.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 11: Page 3, line 3, leave out ("may be cited").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

The Deputy Speaker

As has already been said, I should point out that Amendments Nos. 12, 13 and 14 are in the name of Lord Cameron of Lochbroom and not in the name of Lord Meston, as printed on the Marshalled List.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom moved Amendment No. 12:

Page 3, line 4, at end insert— ("( ) This Act so far as it relates to the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977 may be cited with that Act as the Marriage (Scotland) Acts 1977 and 1986.").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this amendment makes an adjustment to Clause 5 in consequence of the Bill being extended to Scotland. I therefore beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom moved Amendment No. 13: Page 3, line 9, at end insert ("and different days may be so appointed for different provisions").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the purpose of this amendment is to provide that separate commencement orders may be made for Scotland and for England and Wales. While ideally it would be desirable to achieve the same commencement date for both jurisdictions, this amendment allows for the possibility that simultaneous commencement may not be practicable. With that explanation, I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom moved Amendment No. 14: Page 3, line 10, leave out ("This") and insert— ("Section (Marriage between certain persons related by affinity—Scotland) and Schedule (Amendments of Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977) shall extend to Scotland only, but save as aforesaid this").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, as I hinted earlier, I am very grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, for bringing a matter to my attention. I have checked it with those who advise me. The amendment as presently framed on the Marshalled List extends two matters—a section which was the new clause under Amendment 9, and the schedule to which I have already spoken—to Scotland. But the noble and learned Lord drew to my attention—he is quite right about this—the consequence that Amendments Nos. 12 and 13 bring into Clause 5 of the Bill material that also relates to Scotland and might not therefore appear on the face of Amendment No. 14 to be comprehended by that amendment.

9.45 p.m.

If the House would be prepared to accept a slight alteration to Amendment No. 14, it would read: ("Section (Marriage between certain persons related by affinity—Scotland)", and then, This Section", which would refer to Clause 5, and Schedule (Amendments of Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977) shall extend to Scotland": The word "only" is then deleted, and the amendment concludes, but save as aforesaid this".

That would cure entirely the drafting blunder that would arise as a result of your Lordships' House having accepted Amendments Nos. 12 and 13 and make clear beyond peradventure that Clause 5 also extends to Scotland. If your Lordships were of a mind, I would, with that addition and that deletion from the amendment, beg to move the amendment in those terms. I am advised that this would have to be framed by way of a manuscript amendment. No, that is not right. I regret that I have advice from the Table that what I am trying to do cannot be done in your Lordships' House. For that, I must apologise to your Lordships. I shall simply beg to move the amendment as it presently stands in the hope that matters can perhaps be put right at a later stage.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, I rise only to express my gratitude to the noble and learned Lord and to ask if it is really the case that this change cannot be made by a manuscript amendment at this stage. I have known, certainly not on Third Reading, but at earlier stages, manuscript amendments to be accepted by the Chair provided that there was no objection elsewhere in the House. I see that the noble and learned Lord has just been briefed.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom

My Lords, I regret to say that the brief I have been given accords with what I have just stated to your Lordships' House. Regrettably, the rules do not provide for this at Third Reading, although it may be done at earlier stages of the Bill's progress. I can only tender my apologies to your Lordships that this should have arisen. It may require to be cured elsewhere. I accept that it is unfortunate.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

In the Schedule [Amendments of Marriage Act 1949]:

[Amendment No. 15 not moved.]

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 16 and 17: Page 4, line 14, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one") Page 4, line 16, leave out ("that age") and insert ("the age of eighteen")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment and also to Amendment No. 17. I beg to move.

The Deputy Speaker (Earl Cathcart)

My Lords, with the leave of the House, Amendments Nos. 16 and 17 are proposed en bloc.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 18:

Page 4, line 17, at end insert— (" (4) Subject to subsection (5) of this section, a marriage solemnized between a man and any of the persons mentioned in the first column of Part III of the First Schedule to this Act or between a woman and any of the persons mentioned in the second column of the said Part III shall be void. (5) Any such marriage as is mentioned in subsection (4) of this section shall not be void by reason only of affinity if both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one at the time of the marriage and the marriage is solemnized—

  1. (a) in the case of a marriage between a man and the mother of a former wife of his, after the death of both the former wife and the father of the former wife;
  2. (b) in the case of a marriage between a man and the former wife of his son, after the death of both his son and the mother of his son;
  3. (c) in the case of a marriage between a woman and the father of a former husband of hers, after the death of both the former husband and the mother of the former husband;
  4. (d) in the case of a marriage between a woman and a former husband of her daughter, after the death of both her daughter and the father of her daughter.")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I should like to speak also to Amendments Nos. 29, 30 and 31. This is a revised version of the amendment of my noble friend Lady Seear proposed on Report to permit marriage between in-laws where the connecting spouse has died. The amendments cure a weakness in the text created by acceptance of her amendment. The new scheme proposed is a three-part schedule to the Marriage Act 1949 following the style of that Act. In Amendment No. 31, your Lordships will see that there is a new Part III to the schedule to the Marriage Act 1949 created to deal with in-law relationships. Amendments Nos. 29 and 30 are part and parcel of the same scheme. With that explanation, I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 18A.

Page 4, line 24, leave out ("subsection") and insert ("subsections")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Kilmarnock, I beg to move this amendment and speak also to Amendments Nos. 20A, 24A and 27A. These amendments have been introduced at a late stage to provide procedural safeguards which were considered desirable in respect of marriages by common licence and by superintendent registrar's certificate, with particular regard to marriages now to be permitted as a result of the amendments of my noble friend which were accepted at the Report stage.

They parallel the procedure in the Bill as it was originally drafted for step-relation marriages. They are also much closer to the safeguards which already exist under the general Scottish law in relation to marriage, where it appears that they are perhaps less sporting but rather more cautious in these matters. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 19 and 20: Page 4, line 31, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one") Page 4,line 36, leave out ("that age") and insert ("the age of eighteen")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to Amendments Nos. 19 and 20. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amentment No. 20A:

Page 4, line 37, at end insert— ("(1B) In the case of a marriage mentioned in subsection (4) of section 1 of this Act which by virtue of subsection (5) of that section is valid only if at the time of the marriage both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one and the death has taken place of two other persons related to those parties in the manner mentioned in the said subsection (5), a common licence shall not be granted for the solemnization of the marriage unless the person having authority to grant the licence is satisfied by the production of evidence—

  1. (a) that both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one; and
  2. (b) that both those other persons are dead".").

The noble Lord said: On behalf of my noble friend Lord Kilmarnock, I have already spoken to this amendment and I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 21 to 24: Page 4, line 46, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one"). Page 5, line 1, leave out ("that age") and insert ("the age of eighteen"); Page 5, line 11, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one"); Page 5, line 12, leave out ("that age") and insert ("the age of eighteen").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to Amendments Nos. 21, 22, 23 and 24. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 24A: Page 5, line 19, leave out ("section") and insert ("sections").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Kilmarnock, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 25 to 27: Page 5, line 28, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one"). Page 6, line 5, leave out ("eighteen") and insert ("twenty-one"). Page 6, line 6, leave out ("that age") and insert ("the age of eighteen").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to Amendments Nos. 25, 26 and 27. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 27A:

Page 6, line 18, at end insert—

("Provisions relating to section 1(5) marriages.

27C. In the case of a marriage mentioned in subsection (4) of section 1 of this Act which by virtue of subsection (5) of that section is valid only if at the time of the marriage both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one and the death has taken place of two other persons related to those parties in the manner mentioned in the said subsection (5), the superintendent registrar shall not enter notice of the marriage in the marriage notice book unless he is satisfied by the production of evidence—

  1. (a) that both the parties to the marriage have attained the age of twenty-one, and
  2. (b) that both those other persons are dead".").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, on behalf of my noble friend Lord Kilmarnock, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston moved Amendments Nos. 28 to 31: Page 6, line 30, leave out from ("has") to end of line. Page 6, line 35, leave out from ("words") to ("to") in line 37 and insert ("from "Wife's mother" ") Page 6, line 38, leave out from ("words") to ("to") in line 40 and insert ("from "Husband's father" ") Page 7, leave out lines 4 to 9 and insert—

("Daughter of former wife Son of former husband
Former wife of father Former husband of mother
Former wife of father's father Former husband of father's mother
Former wife of mother's father Former husband of mother's mother
Daughter of son of former wife Son of son of former husband
Daughter of daughter of former wife Son of daughter of former husband
PART III
Degrees of affinity referred to in section 1(4) and (5) of this Act.
Mother of former wife Father of former husband
Former wife of son Former husband of daughter")

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to Amendments Nos. 28, 29, 30 and 31. I beg to move.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Cameron of Lochbroom moved Amendment No. 32:

After the Schedule insert the following new Schedule—

("AMENDMENTS OF MARRIAGE (SCOTLAND) ACT 1977 (c. 15)

1. The Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977 shall be amended as follows.

2. In section 2 (prohibited degrees for marriage of related persons)—

  1. (a) at the beginning of subsection (1) there shall be inserted the words "Subject to subsections (1A) and (1B) below,";
  2. (b) after subsection (1) there shall be inserted the following subsection—
    1. "(1A) Subsection (1) above does not apply to a marriage between a man and any woman related to him in a degree specified in column 1 of paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act, or between a woman and any man related to her in a degree specified in column 2 of that paragraph, if—
      1. (a) both parties have attained the age of 21 at the time of the marriage; and
      2. (b) the younger party has not at any time before attaining the age of 18 lived in the same household as the other party and been treated by the other party as a child of his family.
    2. (1B) Subsection (1) above does not apply to a marriage between a man and any woman related to him in a degree specified in column 1 of paragraph 2A of Schedule 1to this Act, or between a woman and any man related to her in a degree specified in column 2 of that paragraph, if both parties to the marriage have attained the age of 21 and the marriage is solemnised—
      3. 1264
      1. (a) in the case of a man marrying the mother of a former wife of his, after the death of both the former wife and the former wife's father;
      2. (b) in the case of a man marrying a former wife of his son, after the death of both his son and his son's mother,
      3. (c) in the case of a woman marrying the father of a former husband of hers, after the death of both the former husband and the former husband's mother;
      4. (d) in the case of a woman marrying a former husband of her daughter, after the death of both her daughter and her daughter's father."; and
  3. (c) after subsection (4) there shall be inserted the following subsection—
(5) Where the parties to an intended marriage are related in a degree specified in paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act, either party may (whether or not an objection to the marriage has been submitted in accordance with section 5(1) of this Act) apply to the Court of Session for a declarator that the conditions specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1A) above are fulfilled in relation to the intended marriage.".

3. In section 3(1) (notice of intention to marry), after paragraph (c) there shall be inserted the following paragraph— (d) where he is related to the other party in a degree specified in paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act, a declaration in the prescribed form stating—

  1. (i) the degree of relationship; and
  2. (ii) that the youngest party has not at any time before attaining the age of 18 lived in the same household as the other party and been treated by the other party as a child of his family.".

4. In section 5 (objections to marriage)—

  1. (a) at the beginning of subsection (3) there shall be inserted the words "Subject to subsection (3A) below,";
  2. (b) after subsection (3) there shall be inserted the following subsection—
(3A) Where—
  1. (a) an objection of which the Registrar General has received notification under subsection (2)(b)(i) above is on the ground that—
    1. (i) the parties are related in a degree specified in paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act; and
    2. (ii) the conditions specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of section 2(1A) of this Act are not satisfied; and
  2. (b) an extract decree of declarator that those conditions are satisfied, granted on an application under section 2(5) of this Act, is produced to the Registrar General, the Registrar General shall inform the district registrar that there is no legal impediment to the marriage on that ground."; and
  3. (c) in subsection (4), for the words "subsection (3) above" there shall be substituted the words "this section".

5. In section 6(1) (the Marriage Schedule), after "5(3)(b)" there shall be inserted "or (3A)".

6. In section 7(1) (marriage outside Scotland where a party resides in Scotland), for the words "(a) and (b)" there shall be substituted the words "(a), (b) and (d)".

7. For paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 (relationship by affinity) there shall be substituted the following paragraphs—

"2—Relationship by affinity referred to in section 2(1A)
Daughter of former wife; Son of former husband;
Former wife of father, Former husband of mother,
Former wife of father's father, Former husband of father's mother,
Former wife of mother's father, Former husband of mother's mother,
Daughter of son of former wife; Son of son of former husband;
Daughter of daughter of former wife; Son of daughter of former husband.
2A.—Relationship by affinity referred to in section 2(1B)
Mother of former wife; Father of former husband;
Former wife of son; Former husband of daughter.")

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Lord Meston

My Lords, I beg to move that the Bill do now pass.

Moved, That the Bill do now pass—(Lord Meston.)

Lord Denning

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Meston, for introducing the Bill and for carrying it through, and I should also like to thank everyone for the most valuable amendments which have been made to the Bill. I only raise the point about the administration of the Bill because unless the provisions of the Bill are complied with, any supposed marriage will be completely void.

One of the important provisions is contained in Clause 1 where it says: the younger party has not at any time before attaining that age"— the age of 18— been a child of the family in relation to the other party". Sometimes that will be a most difficult question to decide. Is the superintendent registrar to decide it? Is the clergyman who is to marry them to decide it? It is a most difficult question. Surely in future there must be circulars or instructions to the registrars and to the clergy. As the Bill carries through the major recommendations of the majority of the No Just Cause group, I should like to see what they said about the difficult situation which involves a child of the family under the age of 18. In paragraph 234 it says: The question though simple to frame could often involve great difficulties in establishing evidence and the absence of adversarial proceedings would seem to indicate the desirability of involving a senior court. Jurisdiction might be given initially to the Family Division of the High Court, with powers for the Lord Chancellor to remit cases to County Courts as a result of an accumulated experience".

I hope that as a result of the Bill there will not be great problems involved for superintendent registrars or for the clergy. I hope that it will not be necessary to have to go to the courts to decide the matter. However, I should like all those concerned with implementing the Bill to consider the point which I have just raised as to how it should be administered in practice by those registrars and clergy. Subject to that one qualification, I endorse the Bill and congratulate and thank all concerned for enabling it to go forward.

Baroness Ewart-Biggs

My Lords, first, I should like to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Meston, on presenting, explaining and steering the Bill through its different stages. I should also like to say how grateful we are on these Benches for the concessions which he made to us as regards what we considered to be important basic points of the Bill. I was glad of the contribution of the noble Baroness, Lady Seear, in bringing forward amendments permitting the marriages of in-laws in certain circumstances, because they, surely, have been the subject of so many painful, lengthy and cumbersome private Bills of which we are all aware. In my view, those amendments are a valuable addition to Lord Meston' s original Bill. I was also pleased that throughout our deliberations on the Bill we heard contributions from the right reverend Prelates who gave their views, their approbation and their agreement to the different proposals which it contained.

One can surely only welcome measures which enable those who wish to get married—those who for the most part wish to enter into this most fundamental and sacred of unions—to do so. Anything that can remove barriers can surely only be welcomed in these days when so sadly we see the very reverse happening and so many marriages breaking apart. Therefore, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Meston, for all the work that he has clearly put into the Bill and I express my hope that it will be given a welcome and a good passage in another place. I wish it good luck and good speed on its way.

10 p.m.

Lord Simon of Glaisdale

My Lords, your Lordships have debated the main issues which arise, social and moral issues of great importance, and this is no time to go into them again. I desire only to say in relation to what was said by my noble and learned friend Lord Denning that I do not apprehend practical difficulties. I think any problem posed by the Bill to a superintendent registrar is no different from the problem which he already has to face in relation to the age of the parties who come before him. During all my time as a matrimonial judge I had only one case in reference to a superintendent registrar's decision, and that was on a difficult question of private international law; never a question of assessing age, which must arise constantly.

Having said that, there is nothing to say except to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Meston, on the admirable way in which he has piloted the Bill and mastered the material down to the smallest detail. It would be quite unfitting for us to pass from this Bill without paying a renewed tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Seear. The whole of the Bill is based on the wonderfully clear and copious report of the committee over which she presided, and I was glad that she got a concession, an amendment made, which was important to her and indeed an important amendment. It has been a very agreeable experience having this Bill conducted by the noble Lord, Lord Meston, and having the noble Baroness able to give the majority report view on its provisions, and I wish the Bill well.

Baroness Seear

My Lords, I should like briefly to thank my noble friend Lord Meston for steering this Bill through. It seemed a small Bill to start with, but it has had an inordinately long life so far. It seems a long time since the noble Baroness, Lady Wootton, first produced a Bill to deal with this subject, and I am glad that we have now been able, with the support of the Bench of Bishops, to get as far as this Bill has taken us.

As your Lordships are aware, it is not quite the Bill that I myself supported, representing the majority report of the committee set up by the most reverend Primate, but nonetheless it makes progress in a matter on which progress was needed. I am most grateful for the interest that has been taken and the support that has been given.

I echo the noble Baroness, Lady Ewart-Biggs, in saying that I hope that time will be found for this Bill in the House of Commons. It is necessary that these changes should be made, and it would be a great pity if, after all the work that has been done, the Bill did not ultimately reach the statute book.

Viscount Davidson

My Lords, I should not like this Bill to pass without saying a few words on behalf of the Government. I have no doubt wearied your Lordships with repeating constantly that the Government remain neutral on the substantive issues which we have discussed during the passage of this Bill. If we have taken sides, as it were, it has been only for the purpose of suggesting drafting amendments. We have not sought to recommend any destination but only the best way to get there.

I should nevertheless like to say that the Government are happy with the outcome, and I trust that the noble Lord's Bill will have a fair passage through another place. If enacted, the Bill would, I think, remove from Parliament the great majority of those cases where a couple, in order to marry, have to promote a personal Bill in Parliament. It is costly to them; it takes up a lot of parliamentary time and, perhaps more seriously, it can be highly embarrassing to the couple concerned to hear intimate details of their lives discussed on the Floor of the House.

Many of your Lordships have described the personal Bills procedure as inappropriate. The noble Baroness, Lady Wootton of Abinger, and the noble Lord, Lord Lloyd of Kilgerran, have promoted general marriage enabling Bills. The noble Lord, Lord Lloyd of Kilgerran, withdrew his Bill in the knowledge of the group being set up by the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury. The report of the group, No Just Cause, has provided the background to the debates in this House at all its stages. The minority report formed the basis of the original Bill, but the amended Bill has some features of the majority report, in that it makes some relaxation of restrictions on marriage between parents and children-in-law.

The Bill, if enacted, would remove most impediments to marriages between affines, those themselves related by marriage. This result is achieved by a Bill which is, one must admit, already of considerable complexity, but this is perhaps only to be expected when one considers the complications introduced by the various types of relationship, the need to balance the interests of the couple with the interests of society at large and the two legal systems. I should like to end, and I know that my noble and learned friend Lord Cameron of Lochbroom joins me in this, by congratulating the noble Lord, Lord Meston, on his foresight and tenacity in introducing the Bill and on successfully piloting it through your Lordships' House.

Lord Meston

My Lords, may I briefly thank all noble Lords who have spoken both this evening and throughout the passage of the Bill? It is, I hope, a useful Bill, with its origin in the report No Just Cause. I join in paying tribute to my noble friend Lady Seear for the excellence of that report, which has proved to be of great assistance to us in understanding the issues involved in this sometimes complex area. I suggest that it has become a better Bill in its passage through your Lordships' House. It has been extended to Scotland. It has been extended, with qualification, to in-laws and it now has the additional safeguard of a minimum age of 21 years for marriage. It is a Bill which has enjoyed, I am grateful to say, constructive help and support and comment from all sides, not least from the Bench of Bishops, who added their considerable weight and authority to this Bill.

I am also grateful for the Government's stance on the matter. They have been benevolent, neutral and helpful. I am particularly grateful. I hope that that attitude will continue, if not improve.

The noble and learned Lord, Lord Denning, touched very sensibly upon the practicalities of how this Bill, if enacted, will work in practice. As I have already stressed several times in the passage of the Bill, there are safeguards written into it. There will nevertheless be difficult and borderline cases. They must be inherent in the deliberately vague definition of the "child of the family". But like the noble and learned Lord, I share the view that when these difficult cases arise it should be a matter for decision by the most senior judges who sit at first instance in this area of the law.

This is not a party matter. It is a Bill which will benefit people at all levels and all strata of society. I certainly hope this is a Bill which will have a fair wind and some of the Government's precious time in another place.

On Question, Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.