AT WHAT TIME IS A MARRIAGE LEGAL

[louisa maud]

Recently someone mentioned a relative of theirs walked away from the church before signing the marriage register and wondered if it was or at what point was legal

I have asked  a person very knowledgeable about church matters, apparently when the priest says
"let no one put a sunder" is where it becomes legal I think,  signing of the register is just a formality
anyway they were married before the signing
Louisa Maud

[majm]

Good question,  what jurisdiction, and what era...

In NSW Australia if married in a church ceremony, then there's two parts of that ceremony that run concurrently.  There's the church service and the civil service.   The marriage is not legal until the paperwork is lodged with the NSW BDM from a civil/statute law position, but from a church position, well ... that depends on the denomination and era.  If married recently, ie post 1961, in any jurisdiction in Australia, then the harmonised statute  law of the Commonwealth would prevail. 

JM

[avm228]

This was the thread - a C of E marriage in England in 1882 between William Sixton and Eliza Ann Percy, where an annotation to the parish register states that the parties “left church without signing” (although the minister did sign the register, it is not signed by the parties or any witnesses):

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=796835.18

The marriage (if it was a marriage) didn’t make it into the GRO index.

[louisa maud]

Yes, that was the thread

Louisa Maud

[Gadget]

My gut feeling would be that it would be legal, according to UK law, when the register was signed and witnessed.  Canonical law would make it legal when they were pronounce man and wife.

I think this is one for Stan 


Gadget

[davidft]

I have a marriage certificate from 1843 that is not signed by the bride or groom but is signed by the witnesses and the curate. I ordered it from the GRO who on finding the absence of the two signatures contacted the Fakenham Registrar's Office to ascertain if the original had the two missing signatures. It did not. However it was the view of the GRO and the Fakenham RO office that the marriage was legal and complete despite the two missing signatures.

[majm]

Here's a current thread, still unresolved issue from NSW Australia ... parish register shows the couple did not turn up, but NSW BDM has the marriage indexed at their online index and the parish register image is digitised and available via Ancestry dot com dot au

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=794238.0

JM

[AntonyMMM]

As a registrar our guidance was that it is at the point where the parties have made the two required legal vows (declaratory and contracting) in front of witnesses.

[majm]

   yes, AntonyMMM my NSW BDM rellies agree with you ! and are fascinated that their own index shows that a marriage has been registered although the parish register says the couple did not show up... on the other hand ... my NSW CofE clergy says (these old chaps are first cousins to each other and good friends) ... no show means no marriage...

Of course, Louise Maud's question will be fascinating for my rellies... hence I have posted here !  Hopefully not too much off topic... 

JM