View Single Post
  #68  
Old 11-24-2011, 03:04 PM
ImaginaryIllusion's Avatar
ImaginaryIllusion ImaginaryIllusion is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonberry View Post
I don't really understand what the law now entails. Is any ceremony whatsoever prohibited? Is it okay if you don't call it marriage? If no contract is signed? And why would that be the deciding factor? What makes it okay if you're hiding it and not okay if you're not?

Plus... it's not even about hiding it, is it? You can call as many people husbands and wives as you want, wear rings for all of them, you just need not to have a ceremony. Although I still don't understand what counts and doesn't count as a ceremony.

I'll try reading the whole thing, but for now I'm really confused.
I don't know if this will help, but these are the sections that deal with the marriage ceremony:
Quote:
[1020] In my view, it is clear that the offence created in ss. 293(1)(a) is premised on some form of sanctioning event because the status prohibited by the section - “polygamy” and “any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time” - both have at their core, as I have discussed, “marriage” (whether or not recognized as legally binding). And “marriage” has at its core the voluntary joining of two individuals with the requisite intent to “marry” and the recognition and sanction by the couple’s community. I have previously noted that a sanctioning event of some formality is contemplated by s. 293.

[1021] That leaves ss. 293(2) to relieve, as I have indicated, from the need to prove the actual method by which the marriage was entered into. Of course, in many instances the existence of the marriage may well be established by proving the sanctioning event, but that is not absolutely necessary. The existence of the marriage, because of ss. 293(2), may be inferred from all of the circumstances before the Court.

[1022] I should be clear that in saying a sanctioning event is contemplated by the section, I am not saying that proof of the event is a constituent element of the offence. Section 293(2) says otherwise. What is an element of the offence is a “marriage” with more than one person at the same time, and an indicia of “marriage”, as I have discussed, is some form of sanctioning event.
Emphasis added.

The Marriage and Conjugal Union parts of the offence require a sanctioning event...this would be an external authority able to conduct such an event. Three people just living together isn't illegal...but as soon as they all walk down the aisle together, it becomes an offense under 293.
__________________
“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.” - Chinese Proverb

-Imaginary Illusion

How did I get here & Where am I going?
Reply With Quote