Many people who have married, or are thinking of marrying, overseas wonder whether their marriage will be legally recognised in England and Wales.
The short answer is: generally yes, as long as the marriage met the legal requirements of the country where it took place. There are only rare exceptions, explained below.
Couples who marry abroad do not need to register their marriage in England and Wales afterwards. Provided the marriage followed the laws of the country where it took place, it should be automatically recognised here.
If you are considering or going through a divorce and are concerned about the legal status of your overseas marriage in England and Wales, contact Vardags today for a free initial consultation with one of our expert divorce solicitors.
If you are considering or going through a divorce and are concerned about the legal status of your overseas marriage in England and Wales, contact Vardags today for a free initial consultation with one of our expert divorce solicitors.
A key principle of English and Welsh marriage law is that the formal validity of a marriage is decided by the lex loci celebrationis, the law of the place where it was celebrated. Whether each person had the capacity to marry, however, is decided by the law of their domicile.
This was neatly summarised by Cotton LJ in Sottomayor v De Barros (No.1) (1877) 3 PD 1:
“The law of a country where a marriage is solemnised must alone decide all questions relating to the validity of the ceremony by which the marriage is alleged to have been constituted; but, as in other contracts, so in that of marriage, personal capacity must depend on the law of domicile.”
A marriage conducted abroad will therefore generally be recognised in England and Wales if it is recognised in the country where it took place. For example, a Nikah conducted in the UAE or Saudi Arabia will be recognised as a valid marriage in England and Wales, because both countries recognise a Nikah as a legal marriage.
Despite the prohibition of bigamy in England and Wales, a polygamous marriage conducted overseas may be recognised. Broadly, it must have been valid in the country where it took place, and neither spouse can have been domiciled in England and Wales at the time of the marriage.
There are rare circumstances in which a foreign marriage will not be recognised in England and Wales. This may happen if:
In practice, the courts are more likely to refuse recognition because of the parties’ domicile than on public policy grounds.
For people domiciled in England and Wales, English and Welsh law can affect the validity of their marriage even if it takes place overseas.
In Pugh v Pugh [1951], a man domiciled in England married a 15-year-old girl domiciled in Hungary, in Austria. The marriage was lawful under Hungarian and Austrian law, but not under English law. Because the husband was domiciled in England and Wales, the court held that the marriage was void.
This approach was followed in A Local Authority v X & Anor (Children) [2013] EWHC 3274 (Fam), where a 14-year-old girl domiciled in England was married in Pakistan to a man domiciled there. The court held that, following Pugh, the English minimum age for marriage applies abroad if either party is domiciled in England and Wales. Since the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) Act 2022, the minimum age for marriage in England and Wales is 18, and arranging a child marriage, including abroad, is a criminal offence.
This principle comes from Cheni v Cheni [1965], which involved an uncle and niece who had married in Egypt under Jewish and Egyptian law. The couple later moved to England, and the wife applied for a declaration that the marriage was void. Although marriages between uncles and nieces are prohibited in England and Wales, Sir Jocelyn Simon recognised the marriage as valid. He said the question is whether a marriage is “so offensive to the conscience of the English court that it should refuse to recognise and give effect to the proper foreign law”, and that the court should exercise “common sense, good manners and a reasonable tolerance”. The marriage did not meet that threshold.
By contrast, in KC & Anor v City of Westminster Social & Community Services Dept. & Anor [2008] EWCA Civ 198, an overseas marriage was refused recognition. The ‘husband’, IC, was domiciled in England and Wales and had a severe intellectual impairment and autism, so he did not have capacity to marry under English law. His family arranged for him to marry a woman in Bangladesh in a ceremony conducted over the phone. The marriage was lawful under Bangladeshi and Sharia law, but it was not recognised in England and Wales.
In KC, the ‘husband’ was also domiciled in England and Wales. Where neither party is domiciled here, case law suggests that refusing recognition on grounds of public policy will be rare. In Alhaji Mohamed v Knott [1969] 1 QB 1, for example, the marriage of a 13-year-old girl and a 26-year-old man was recognised as valid, because it was lawful in Nigeria, where both were domiciled. The very different outcome in Pugh, decided over a decade earlier, came down to domicile.
Yes. Just like couples who married in England and Wales, couples who married abroad, whether their marriage is valid, void or voidable, may be able to apply for financial relief here, provided the English court has jurisdiction.
Where a divorce has already taken place abroad, it may be possible to apply for financial relief under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984.
Whether someone who married overseas can apply for financial relief in England depends on English law, not the law of the country where they married. This was confirmed in Tousi v Gaydukova [2024] EWCA Civ 203.
If you married abroad and are now seeking a divorce, you may need an expert in the law of the country where the ceremony took place, to confirm whether a legal marriage took place there.
Tousi v Gaydukova concerned the validity of a marriage between an Iranian husband and a Ukrainian wife. Their ceremony took place at the Iranian Embassy in Ukraine, and both intended and believed it to be a valid marriage. However, it was not valid under Ukrainian or Iranian law.
At the first hearing, the judge made a transfer of tenancy order in the wife’s favour, without considering whether the marriage was valid. The husband appealed on this basis, and the case was heard by Mostyn J in the High Court.
Mostyn J held that the ceremony had been a ‘non-qualifying ceremony’ and dismissed the appeal. He also found that the parties had no access to financial remedies, because none would have been available under Ukrainian law. As a result, a nullity order could not be granted, and the first judge had been right to make a transfer of tenancy order on the basis that the parties were not spouses.
At the Court of Appeal, Moylan LJ agreed that the transfer of tenancy order was valid, but disagreed with Mostyn J’s view that the parties had no access to financial remedies in England and Wales because of the position in Ukraine. He held that the country where the marriage takes place does not determine whether relief is available in England and Wales. If a marriage conducted abroad is invalid, the court must decide what relief is available according to whether, under English and Welsh law, the marriage is void, voidable, or a non-qualifying ceremony (a non-marriage).
The information on this website is intended as a guide and does not constitute legal advice. Vardags do not accept liability for any errors in the information on this website, nor any losses stemming from reliance upon the statements made herein. All articles and pages aim to reflect the legal position at time they were published, and may have been rendered obsolete by subsequent developments in the law. Should you require specialist advice, tailored to your situation, please see how Vardags can help you.
Vardags Limited is a limited company trading as Vardags, Company No 7199468, registered in England and Wales, having its registered office at 10 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7NG. Vardags is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA Number 535955). Its VAT number is 99 001 7230.
Vardags uses the term ‘Partner’ as a professional title only, to describe a Senior Solicitor, Employee or Consultant with relevant experience, expertise and qualifications (whether legally qualified or otherwise) to merit the title. Our Partners are not partners in the legal sense. They are not liable for the debts, liabilities or obligations of Vardags Limited. Similarly, the term ’Director’ is a professional title only, to describe an employee or consultant of Vardags with relevant experience, expertise and qualifications to merit the title. It does not necessarily imply that the relevant individual is a director of Vardags Limited.
A list of the directors of Vardags Limited and a list of the names of those using the title of ’Director’ and ’Partner’ together with their official status is available for inspection at Vardags’ registered office.
