Supreme Court rules that only first marriage of Lebanese man is valid

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 02:01PM #1

I read this today:

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/supreme-court-unanimously-rules-that-first-of-lebanese-mans-two-marriages-is-valid-under-irish-law-793737.html

I have to say, I'm a bit taken a back by it.

First off, this guy is a refugee, the tax payers of this country have provided care for him. Why the hell is challenging our laws? IMO If he want's the marriages to be Valid, he should go back home.

Second, How the hell did this make it to the supreme court (with 7 judges)?
This should have been struck out at a district court level. The law is very clear in relation to marriage in Ireland.

It also just goes to show that a lot of people from the middle east have absolutely no interest in integrating. This case IMO is fairly insulting to the women of Ireland.

And finally, does anyone have any idea how much this s going to cost the Tax payer? I'd imagine the legal costs for such a challenge wouldn't be cheap.

Fairly annoyed now I have to say.

15-06-2017 02:07PM

It doesn't show that 'a lot' of people from anywhere want anything, just that this guy thinks he should be allowed two wives. He didn't get his way, the world didn't fall apart, and we'll all move on with our lives.

15-06-2017 02:10PM

What a waste. Obviously in their unanimous (and obvious) judgment they also said that it's not definitive for other cases. Keep that conveyor belt going.

Drumpot · 15-06-2017 02:11PM

Did you email Joe?

Think he gets paid enough to fix these sort of things...

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 02:35PM

Candie wrote: »

It doesn't show that 'a lot' of people from anywhere want anything, just that this guy thinks he should be allowed two wives. He didn't get his way, the world didn't fall apart, and we'll all move on with our lives.

I apologise for the sweeping statement

Deleted User wrote: »

What a waste. Obviously in their unanimous (and obvious) judgment they also said that it's not definitive for other cases. Keep that conveyor belt going.

Any idea how much it cost?

Drumpot wrote: »

Did you email Joe?

Think he gets paid enough to fix these sort of things...

I fooking should have emailed Joe!
He'd be all over that!!!

corner of hells · 15-06-2017 02:45PM

Candie wrote: »

It doesn't show that 'a lot' of people from anywhere want anything, just that this guy thinks he should be allowed two wives. He didn't get his way, the world didn't fall apart, and we'll all move on with our lives.

And you can feck off with your sensible and logical approach.

Now I have a flaming torch and pitchfork to get rid of.

15-06-2017 02:53PM

grahambo wrote: »

Why the hell is challenging our laws? IMO If he want's the marriages to be Valid, he should go back home.

He sought to have his first wife enter here in 2003 but she was refused permission. In 2004, she was permitted to enter on condition he take a legal action as to whether his first marriage could be recognised under Irish law

grahambo wrote: »

The law is very clear in relation to marriage in Ireland.

Agreed, I would have thought Irish law would have recognised his first marriage over his second. There's more to this I think.

cajonlardo · 15-06-2017 02:57PM

Drumpot wrote: »

Did you email Joe?

Think he gets paid enough to fix these sort of things...

So, you and all the other little princesses are happy enough for our taxes to cover this bolllox?

No wonder arsewipes like yer man try it on. No one has the balls to tell his ilk to drop dead.

" I want 2 wives"
" Grand so, here is the Flight times back to 2 wife land "

megaten · 15-06-2017 02:58PM

cajonlardo wrote: »

So, you and all the other little princesses are happy enough for our taxes to cover this bolllox?

No wonder arsewipes like yer man try it on. No one has the balls to tell his ilk to drop dead.

" I want 2 wives"
" Grand so, here is the Flight times back to 2 wife land "

What are you doing about it?

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 02:59PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Agreed, I would have thought Irish law would have recognised his first marriage over his second. There's more to this I think.

Yes I read that, but it's confusing.
The first marriage is the one that's been recognised and not the second.

So what happens now?
One would assume that the woman from the second marriage is in Ireland, so what happens her now?

15-06-2017 03:01PM

grahambo wrote: »

Any idea how much it cost?

A fiver?

grahambo wrote: »

Yes I read that, but it's confusing.
The first marriage is the one that's been recognised and not the second.

So what happens now?
One would assume that the woman from the second marriage is in Ireland, so what happens her now?

Usual Irish fudge, not her fault the rules were broken/she's naturalised or whatever.

Deise Vu · 15-06-2017 03:04PM

Jesus Grahambo, you will give us right wing fascists a bad name if you don't even read the article you are outraged about. He is a citizen since 2000, no mention of being a refugee or tax-payer funded. His second wife was already here since 2001 and the first wife was given permission to enter in 2003 on condition he take a court action to find out if his first marriage would be recognised under Irish law.

Our asylum laws are ludicrous and need a radical overhaul but I wouldn't be holding this up as an example of it's disfunction.

cajonlardo · 15-06-2017 03:05PM

megaten wrote: »

What are you doing about it?

Short answer is that there isn't a whole lot I can do. Simply because there is HUGE money being made out of snag causing so & so's like him

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 03:15PM

Deise Vu wrote: »

Jesus Grahambo, you will give us right wing fascists a bad name if you don't even read the article you are outraged about. He is a citizen since 2000, no mention of being a refugee or tax-payer funded. His second wife was already here since 2001 and the first wife was given permission to enter in 2003 on condition he take a court action to find out if his first marriage would be recognised under Irish law.

Our asylum laws are ludicrous and need a radical overhaul but I wouldn't be holding this up as an example of it's disfunction.

I get all this.

I wouldn't say I'm right wing at all now, but all 3 came in as refugees, and that's fine. I don't care about that.
But why did he declare that both of them were his wives, when he should have known that having 2 wives is illegal here?

He clearly chanced his arm with the "This is my culture" line, and it's paid off for him.

Sorry, but I just find it extremely misogynistic, that this country would even entertain the notion of a man have multiple wives.

In the article is says the women support it, but in fairness they have no choice but to support it.

topper75 · 15-06-2017 03:18PM

The system is set up to explicitly transfer pooled funds from the working Irish to outsiders.

And then transfer even greater sums to the judges and solicitors who run that system.

But I guess I need to be learn to be 'tolerant'.

Whatever that word means nowadays.

It really takes some cheek to willingly arrive in a country and move to change the laws of that country to suit your circumstance. How does a refugee fund a legal challenge like this? Did he short mortgage-backed securities in the crash?

Is this Leo's "European centre"?

15-06-2017 03:20PM

grahambo wrote: »

Yes I read that, but it's confusing.
The first marriage is the one that's been recognised and not the second.

So what happens now?
One would assume that the woman from the second marriage is in Ireland, so what happens her now?

The article says she's already a resident here, has been for years. Maybe nothing will change, this was just about getting the first marriage recognised so the wife could stay, as he was apparently instructed to do.

I guess it depends on why the application for his first wife was refused in the first place.

wakka12 · 15-06-2017 03:20PM

And he didnt end up changing our laws..he wasnt allowed
moving on

c_man · 15-06-2017 03:23PM

What a disgrace. I thought we wanted marriage equality in this country.

topper75 · 15-06-2017 03:25PM

wakka12 wrote: »

And he didnt end up changing our laws..he wasnt allowed
moving on

Move on because questions would be awkward.

Next client. Next case. Next hefty bill.

I think the story merits a lot of questions as to just who the heck we are letting into our state.

seamus · 15-06-2017 03:26PM

He wasn't trying to change our laws

Just thought I'd clarify that for people who read the OP and not the link.

The High Court had ruled that his first marriage was invalid - i.e. that the man was not married at all.

The Supreme Court ruling clarified that his first marriage is valid, and the second is not. Which is exactly what I thought the law was anyway.

What confused the issue is that his second wife came to live in Ireland before his first one. So there was clearly a bit of a mess up by the immigration authorities on this.

Sleepy · 15-06-2017 03:32PM

I really don't see why three people shouldn't be allowed to be married if that's what they all want tbh.

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 03:34PM

seamus wrote: »

He wasn't trying to change our laws

Just thought I'd clarify that for people who read the OP and not the link.

The High Court had ruled that his first marriage was invalid - i.e. that the man was not married at all.

The Supreme Court ruling clarified that his first marriage is valid, and the second is not. Which is exactly what I thought the law was anyway.

What confused the issue is that his second wife came to live in Ireland before his first one. So there was clearly a bit of a mess up by the immigration authorities on this.

I believe he knew exactly what he was doing here.

Clearly in Ireland ,the first marriage is the one that stands, and that's why he brought the 2nd wife in first. Let that application clear, and then attempt to bring in the 1st one. Knowing that the first marriage would be the one that was recognised.

He could have "left it" at the high court but didn't, he kept going.
Maybe he wasn't attempting to change our laws but he was without a doubt, trying to circumvent an extremely important one.
And once one person finds an effective legal bypass of a law, it may as well be written into law.

Frank O. Pinion · 15-06-2017 03:34PM

People are saying a man shouldn't be "allowed" two wives, how about women that want a husband and a wife? Equality for polyamorous people should be next.

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 03:37PM

Sleepy wrote: »

I really don't see why three people shouldn't be allowed to be married if that's what they all want tbh.

The women probably didn't have a choice at the time.
Women are treated like cattle in many middle eastern countries.

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

People are saying a man shouldn't be "allowed" two wives, how about women that want a husband and a wife? Equality for polyamorous people should be next.

Oh Jesus...

What have I started, Lock this thread quick!

c_man · 15-06-2017 03:40PM

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

People are saying a man shouldn't be "allowed" two wives, how about women that want a husband and a wife? Equality for polyamorous people should be next.

Yep, but also people should be allowed to marry themselves legally.

ebbsy · 15-06-2017 03:46PM

I think that the guy and his Mrs should be ****ed out of Ireland.

ScumLord · 15-06-2017 03:51PM

grahambo wrote: »

But why did he declare that both of them were his wives, when he should have known that having 2 wives is illegal here?

because they were both his wife's, if you went to china and they still had the one child rule would you just leave one of your children at home?

Sorry, but I just find it extremely misogynistic, that this country would even entertain the notion of a man have multiple wives.

In the article is says the women support it, but in fairness they have no choice but to support it.

You don't know that. Some people can make having multiple wives work, especially in the modern world, you can have two parents working and one at home childminding, it's makes perfect financial sense and if the women get along then there isn't an issue.

Your making a whole load of assumptions based purely on your own experience and ignorance of everything beyond your experience.

cajonlardo · 15-06-2017 03:58PM

ScumLord wrote: »

because they were both his wife's, if you went to china and they still had the one child rule would you just leave one of your children at home?

I can just imagine what would happen if I arrived in China and went to court to challenge their laws......................

Yamanoto · 15-06-2017 04:01PM

ScumLord wrote: »

if you went to china and they still had the one child rule would you just leave one of your children at home?

Given the glaringly obvious clash of cultural norms, I'd probably decide China wasn't the right spot for me.

Beta Ray Bill · 15-06-2017 04:09PM

ScumLord wrote: »

because they were both his wife's, if you went to china and they still had the one child rule would you just leave one of your children at home?

No.
I'd just not go there, or if I had to, I'd pay the extra tax for having an additional child.

ScumLord wrote: »

You don't know that. Some people can make having multiple wives work, especially in the modern world, you can have two parents working and one at home childminding, it's makes perfect financial sense and if the women get along then there isn't an issue.

Your making a whole load of assumptions based purely on your own experience and ignorance of everything beyond your experience.

Come on now... You genuinely think that:
A) That kind of setup would work in Western country. Family law is messed up enough here as it is.

That those women agreed to be married IE it was not arranged for them.

I'm far from ignorant.
I've a few friends from Libya and Pakistan, and I worked closely with some on from Iran.
I've a good understanding of that part of the world. (from what those people have told me)

One of my mates actually went back to Pakistan get married (arranged), I would have considered him fairly "Westernised", so was fairly shocked when he went back.

ScumLord · 15-06-2017 04:36PM

grahambo wrote: »

Come on now... You genuinely think that:
A) That kind of setup would work in Western country. Family law is messed up enough here as it is.
That those women agreed to be married IE it was not arranged for them.

I'm far from ignorant.
I've a few friends from Libya and Pakistan, and I worked closely with some on from Iran.
I've a good understanding of that part of the world. (from what those people have told me)

One of my mates actually went back to Pakistan get married (arranged), I would have considered him fairly "Westernised", so was fairly shocked when he went back.

I don't know for sure either way, I have heard american Muslims explain the reasons they introduced a second wife and they were all practical reasons. I think it's playing with fire but there are obvious advantages to having a marriage with 3 people over 2 people.

You seem to have a problem with it because it's alien and assume that our way is the correct way even though marriages with multiple wives has been common outside of the Christian faith and just uncommon in the Christian faith for thousands upon thousands of years..

Arranged marriages are also common, and not always unwanted. Your friend that went home to get married just goes to show even when you have the opportunity to find you own partner people still go back for arranged marriages. We all think the American model is the best but it's track record isn't great with a lot of marriages ending up in divorce. At least with an arranged marriage people know what the deal is, with an American marriage when the new couple lust wears off they're left in a marriage that isn't what they signed up for.

I'm not saying arranged marriages are better, I'm just saying they're another option, if the people involved are happy to go ahead then it's not our place to belittle them for it.

Supreme Court rules that only first marriage of Lebanese man is valid

Comments