Civil Partnership and Hetrosexual Couple

UDP · 30-05-2012 10:38AM #1

Hi,

I (male) would like to have a civil partnership with my girlfriend of 8 years. I do not want to go down the route of marraige yet as we would like to have a wedding ceremony in a few years with friends so would rather not have one now (it seems you are forced to have a ceremony when you get married which I find ridiculous). For now I would like to just sign a piece of paper so that we can at least get tax benefits and then get married at a later date.

Is this possible in Ireland? From my research on the net it seems some people say a civil partnership is only allowed for same-sex couples others say the law that was passed has implications for hetrosexual couples too. Would be a disappointing rather ironic if civil partnership was only allowed for same sex partners and not hetrosexual.

At present it looks to me like we have no choice but to get married to get any of the tax benefits of being a co-habiting couple.

Anyone know if hetrosexuals can have a civil partnership in Ireland?

MrTsSnickers · 30-05-2012 11:42AM

Think that you can have a registry office wedding but contact your local civil registration office. I know people who have done what you want to do (as in got married but had a ceremony and party later).

Moonbeam · 30-05-2012 01:33PM

No ,it is not possible in Ireland.

UDP · 30-05-2012 01:40PM

Yes, unfortunately it may be the case that I have to have a registry office wedding but I am still required to have a ceremony there. Even though it can be just the couple and 2 witnesses a ceremony still is required to take place. Whereas for a civil partnership, from my reading, does not require a ceremony or witnesses.

MrTsSnickers · 30-05-2012 01:41PM

I definitely know people that have gotten married before the actual big day. They had a couple of witnesses and then went out to dinner after.

edit: "Yes, unfortunately it may be the case that I have to have a registry office wedding but I am still required to have a ceremony there. Even though it can be just the couple and 2 witnesses a ceremony still does take place. Whereas for a civil partnership, from my reading, does not require a ceremony or witnesses."

ah okay, my mistake.

mayobumblebee · 30-05-2012 01:47PM

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/2004/a304.pdf
no you cant enter into a civil partnership unless you are bot of the same sex

UDP · 30-05-2012 01:48PM

MrTsSnickers wrote: »

I definitely know people that have gotten married before the actual big day. They had a couple of witnesses and then went out to dinner after.

Yes, that is my plan but it means that we have to have 2 witnesses and not tell anyone or else it really dilutes the actual ceremony.

Bride2012 · 30-05-2012 07:24PM

UDP wrote: »

MrTsSnickers wrote: »

I definitely know people that have gotten married before the actual big day. They had a couple of witnesses and then went out to dinner after.

Yes, that is my plan but it means that we have to have 2 witnesses and not tell anyone or else it really dilutes the actual ceremony.

You don't actually have to know them. I saw a thread on the Cork City forum a few months ago asking for two witnesses.

Gatica · 31-05-2012 01:41PM

The civil partnership was brought in to give same-sex couples similar-ish (in Ireland at least) rights to married heterosexual couples, i.e. recognition of their commitment, love and "for life" intents towards each other as well as tax benefits. Marriage is already the heterosexual couples' "partnership", there is no in-between level... unless you count certain rights if you've been co-habiting for over a period of time (hearsay since I don't know for a fact this is the case).
They call it a ceremony, but you really don't need to do anything other than have the two witnesses there and say "I do" to the 2-3 things that you need to say them to, to make the contract binding (you take this woman/man to be your wife/husband, you're doing this of your free will, knowing you don't have any impediment, you are of legal age, etc...).

PS: forgot to say, you can always do the legal bit now and then hire a celebrant for the proper family and friends ceremony with the celebrations etc...

UDP · 31-05-2012 09:30PM

Gatica wrote: »

The civil partnership was brought in to give same-sex couples similar-ish (in Ireland at least) rights to married heterosexual couples, i.e. recognition of their commitment, love and "for life" intents towards each other as well as tax benefits. Marriage is already the heterosexual couples' "partnership", there is no in-between level... unless you count certain rights if you've been co-habiting for over a period of time (hearsay since I don't know for a fact this is the case).

Unfortunately even since we have been co-habiting for many years we get no extra rights. We are forced to pay hundreds of euro of extra tax etc a month and then the fact we are co-habiting goes against either of us if we need to make any claims of social welfare etc.

Gatica wrote: »

They call it a ceremony, but you really don't need to do anything other than have the two witnesses there and say "I do" to the 2-3 things that you need to say them to, to make the contract binding (you take this woman/man to be your wife/husband, you're doing this of your free will, knowing you don't have any impediment, you are of legal age, etc...).

It is a ceremony though. It is not the same as just going to a desk and signing a piece of paper like is done with civil partnership.

Gatica wrote: »

PS: forgot to say, you can always do the legal bit now and then hire a celebrant for the proper family and friends ceremony with the celebrations etc...

That is what we have planned to do but it means that we have to go to have a ceremony with just us and the witnesses and then have a ceremony in a few years with family.

It is crazy that they tried to resolve equality by creating further inequality. I cannot see how co-habiting hetrosexual couples would not have the option of a civil partnership to give them tax rights etc like same sex couples.

baby and crumble · 31-05-2012 09:49PM

OP, the law was created because there was no option for same sex couples to enter into a legally binding relationship status. Whether you like it or not, you do have the option of a quick civil marriage. With civil partnership you do need witnesses, and to speak certain words in front of them. Which is the exact same as a civil marriage. The nuts and bolts of the procedure are no different. My brother got married in a registry office and he just needed 2 witnesses (who can be strangers, so long as they have official identification) and to say I think its something like 25 words each. That's it, it takes like 10 minutes, if even.

tatli_lokma · 01-06-2012 02:16PM

I think you miss the whole point of the civil partnership bill. It is there to give same-sex couples a modicum of equal rights to heterosexual conterparts. It is not equal to marriage in heterosexual couples. Ask any gay person who wants to marry their partner if the civil partnership legislation is enough and they will say no - they want to be married, the civil partnership is a diluted form of this only introduced to keep the more conservative right wing groups of society happy. It is seen as a 'happy medium' from the government, but not nearly enough in the eyes of the LGBT community.

Stop whinging that you can't get tax rights....gay people in civil partnership didn't enter into it for tax rights, they did it cos they want to be married and can't and this is the closest thing available.

You are either prepared to make a committment of marriage or you are not. You can't have it both ways.

UDP · 01-06-2012 02:37PM

baby and crumble wrote: »

OP, the law was created because there was no option for same sex couples to enter into a legally binding relationship status. Whether you like it or not, you do have the option of a quick civil marriage. With civil partnership you do need witnesses, and to speak certain words in front of them. Which is the exact same as a civil marriage. The nuts and bolts of the procedure are no different. My brother got married in a registry office and he just needed 2 witnesses (who can be strangers, so long as they have official identification) and to say I think its something like 25 words each. That's it, it takes like 10 minutes, if even.

They are different. For a marraige a ceremony is required and costs 150 euro. For a civil partnership a ceremony is not required and it is free.

tatli_lokma · 01-06-2012 02:49PM

UDP wrote: »

They are different. For a marraige a ceremony is required and costs 150 euro. For a civil partnership a ceremony is not required and it is free.

from the General Registry office website:

Civil partnership registration may take place at the office of a Registrar or at a venue which has been agreed between the couple and the Registrar and approved in advance by the Registrar.
The civil partnership registration must take place in a place that is open to the public and in the presence of two witnesses who are both over 18 years of age.
The legal requirements for registration or a civil partnership are:
That the registrar is satisfied that the parties to the civil partnership understand the nature of the civil partnership,

that each party declares:
that they do not know of any impediment to the civil partnership,

their intention to live with and support the other party, and

that they accept the other party as a civil partner, and

signature of the CPRF by the parties to the civil partnership, the witnesses and the Registrar

sounds like a ceremony to me - of course you can make it as fancy or as simple as you want. A 'marriage' in the registry office is the same - open to the public, and a public declaration.
You can't get a civil partnership behind closed doors by just signing a form - you still need to make your declaration in front of the registrar, witnesses and it has to be open to the public. In my eyes its still a ceremony, if a diluted version of the marriage ceremony.

UDP · 01-06-2012 02:49PM

Little Ted wrote: »

I think you miss the whole point of the civil partnership bill. It is there to give same-sex couples a modicum of equal rights to heterosexual conterparts. It is not equal to marriage in heterosexual couples. Ask any gay person who wants to marry their partner if the civil partnership legislation is enough and they will say no - they want to be married, the civil partnership is a diluted form of this only introduced to keep the more conservative right wing groups of society happy. It is seen as a 'happy medium' from the government, but not nearly enough in the eyes of the LGBT community.

I don't miss the point - I think it was you who completely missed my points. I was merely asking if it was only for those of the same sex and it does not require a ceremony and there is no fee. I believe in equality for everyone so I dont think there should be one law for homosexuals and another for hetrosexuals. A person should be allowed to get married without a ceremony if they so wish and that is what is offered as part of the civil partnership which is what I would have liked to do if it was available to me.

Little Ted wrote: »

Stop whinging that you can't get tax rights....gay people in civil partnership didn't enter into it for tax rights, they did it cos they want to be married and can't and this is the closest thing available.

Nice generalisation.

Little Ted wrote: »

You are either prepared to make a committment of marriage or you are not. You can't have it both ways.

Its nothing to do with the commitment. It is about being forced to have a ceremony and the extra cost for people who are financially struggling vs not being forced to have a ceremony and it being free. So please get off your high horse.

UDP · 01-06-2012 02:53PM

Little Ted wrote: »

from the General Registry office website:
[/LIST]sounds like a ceremony to me - of course you can make it as fancy or as simple as you want. A 'marriage' in the registry office is the same - open to the public, and a public declaration.
You can't get a civil partnership behind closed doors by just signing a form - you still need to make your declaration in front of the registrar, witnesses and it has to be open to the public. In my eyes its still a ceremony, if a diluted version of the marriage ceremony.

Please look again:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/civil_partnerships/registering_a_civil_partnership.html

Citizens Information wrote:

Civil partnerships may simply be registered. There is no necessity to have a civil partnership ceremony, unlike marriages which require a marriage ceremony. Civil partners may choose to have a ceremony and, if they do, the requirements are similar to those that apply to civil marriage ceremonies.

This is exactly what I was looking to do except it would be nicer if I didn't need witnesses but obviously there is no way around that other than getting strangers to appear on the wedding certificate which I don't want to do. I then saw conflicting information on the net as to whether it applies to hetrosexual couples also so I posted here to see if anyone knew what the story was for sure.

The Big Red Button · 01-06-2012 03:01PM

UDP wrote: »

I don't miss the point - I think it was you who completely missed my points. I was merely asking if it was only for those of the same sex and it does not require a ceremony and there is no fee. I believe in equality for everyone so I dont think there should be one law for homosexuals and another for hetrosexuals.

F*cking hell! :eek:

If you believe in equality for everyone, go out campaigning for marriage rights for everyone!

In my opinion, it's bloody insulting what you're doing.

Everyone should be entitled to the same rights as regards marriage, regardless of sexuality. While civil partnerships are a step forward for homosexual couples, it's still pretty damn crap that they're not allowed get married like anyone else.

So you're basically bitching that you're not allowed get a civil partnership? When there are so many homosexual couples out there who would love to be allowed to marry, a privilege that you're refusing yourself? Because you want "equality" with homosexual couples?

Do you think that they're getting one up on you somehow?

Grow up, get a perspective on life. If you want to be with your partner for "tax purposes", as you've implied, then marry her. Otherwise, just live with her and be happy with her.

I'm heterosexual, but if I were a person in a same-sex relationship reading this, I'd be feeling pretty pissed off right now. You just don't seem to know how lucky you are!

UDP · 01-06-2012 03:20PM

chatterpillar wrote: »

F*cking hell! :eek:

If you believe in equality for everyone, go out campaigning for marriage rights for everyone!

In my opinion, it's bloody insulting what you're doing.

What exactly is it that I am doing that is so bloody insulting?

chatterpillar wrote: »

Everyone should be entitled to the same rights as regards marriage, regardless of sexuality. While civil partnerships are a step forward for homosexual couples, it's still pretty damn crap that they're not allowed get married like anyone else.

Which is what I believe too. Did you not read my posts before exploding?

chatterpillar wrote: »

So you're basically bitching that you're not allowed get a civil partnership? When there are so many homosexual couples out there who would love to be allowed to marry, a privilege that you're refusing yourself? Because you want "equality" with homosexual couples?

No, I am not happy that there is such a thing as a civil partnership that suits me better in my circumstances at present but I am not allowed avail of it simply due to my sexuality.

chatterpillar wrote: »

Do you think that they're getting one up on you somehow?

Who is getting up on me? WTF are you on about?

chatterpillar wrote: »

Grow up, get a perspective on life. If you want to be with your partner for "tax purposes", as you've implied, then marry her. Otherwise, just live with her and be happy with her.

FFS another person not able to read? We are currently trying to get by on a daily basis with one income but we are paying way more tax than we should be which is putting massive strain on us unnecessarily. I wanted to some sort of legal partnership with as little ceremony etc as possible (and costing as little as possible) so that it does not take away from the actual marraige which we are planning to take place in 2-3 years time. In the meantime during those 2-3 years we will have paid about €15k extra in tax as a result of not being a couple in the eyes of the law. That extra money would pay for a bloody nice wedding and honeymoon.

Please read my posts before jumping to stupid conclusions.

Zaph · 01-06-2012 07:31PM

UDP wrote: »

In the meantime during those 2-3 years we will have paid about €15k extra in tax as a result of not being a couple in the eyes of the law. That extra money would pay for a bloody nice wedding and honeymoon.

So given that the law isn't going to change the way you'd like it to any time soon, why not look at the €150 it costs for a civil wedding as an investment which will net €15k in 3 years. There's not much else will give you a 10,000% return, especially in that time frame.

UDP · 01-06-2012 09:04PM

Zaph wrote: »

So given that the law isn't going to change the way you'd like it to any time soon, why not look at the €150 it costs for a civil wedding as an investment which will net €15k in 3 years. There's not much else will give you a 10,000% return, especially in that time frame.

The problem was coming up with the initial 150 first.

baby and crumble · 01-06-2012 10:58PM

I can see how the fact that the marriage license is €150 and the civil partnership seems to be 'free' could be seen as unequal. However, OP, there are 169 differences between civil partnership and civil marriage, including inheritance rights, protection from violence and protection for children of the union.

I am genuinely surprised someone would prefer a lesser option when they have the choice to have he full version. For the sake of €150... I mean I'm on the dole and broke, but tbh I'd find a way to gather it up if it meant having an equal, legal, recognised relationship with my partner.

UDP · 01-06-2012 11:52PM

baby and crumble wrote: »

I can see how the fact that the marriage license is €150 and the civil partnership seems to be 'free' could be seen as unequal. However, OP, there are 169 differences between civil partnership and civil marriage, including inheritance rights, protection from violence and protection for children of the union.

I am genuinely surprised someone would prefer a lesser option when they have the choice to have he full version. For the sake of €150... I mean I'm on the dole and broke, but tbh I'd find a way to gather it up if it meant having an equal, legal, recognised relationship with my partner.

Temporarily for 2-3 years while it suits.

Its our choice which we would prefer and not being forced to have a ceremony and it being free would be preferable in my situation until it suited better to have a full marraige. I can't believe people throwing abuse at me for wanting that choice.

I do think it is discriminatory law against heterosexuals since I believe people should be subject to the same rights no matter what their sexuality. Surely homosexuals currently being discriminated against should understand that more than anyone else even if it is nowhere near the same scale.

It seems to me that people are afraid that if someone actually wanted a civil partnership over marraige (due to it suiting them even if just for a short period) then it undermines the battle for equal status for homosexuals under the law with regards marraige. That is simply not the case here since I have made it quite clear that I don't agree with laws that limit the rights of a person because of their sexuality - whether straight or gay.

Believe or not my financial situation until quite recently was much worse than yours is now on the dole but the likes of not being forced to have a ceremony would be nice too until we would be in a position to get married. Many of the other rights do not concern us as a couple at present but they will which is why we would have gotten married at a later date anyway.

baby and crumble · 02-06-2012 02:43AM

I personally cannot see the argument that a law that gives less rights to one group if people is discriminatory to the other group who can have full and total rights. I guess my brain is also stalling at the constant mentions of it "suiting" you temporarily or something. Seems like a bit of a business arrangement or something.

But hey best of luck getting something sorted for yourself.

xeresod · 02-06-2012 01:28PM

Civil partnership costs €150 - see here

iguana · 02-06-2012 03:14PM

I'm going to close this thread as it seems UDP has gotten it completely backwards as a civil partnership is entered into with nearly the same 'ceremony' as a civil marriage and costs the exact same amount of money. So no inequality for heterosexuals there. I suspect he's gotten it mixed up with the UK where there is no requirement for a 'ceremony' for a CP but unlike here the partnership does actually confer the same rights as marriage.

Civil Partnership and Hetrosexual Couple

Comments