A woman yesterday filed an application before the First Hall of the Civil Court requesting it to refer the matter to a Constitutional Court after the Family Court ceased to hear her case for separation because she had filed a case before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal for her marriage to be annulled.

The woman, whose name is not being published in order to protect her identity as is normal practice in such cases, explained that she had started separation proceedings before the First Hall of the Civil Court.

In the meantime, she also filed a case before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal in order to declare her Christian marriage null.

In view of this, the Family Court decided to apply article 30 (2) of the Marriage Act which deals with the suspension of proceedings when the matter is before another tribunal.

This article states that the court shall cease to be competent to deal with the matter where an action is pending before a tribunal for a declaration of nullity of a marriage.

It states that the court shall suspend the hearing of the case before it, and may not resume hearing the case and, in any case, shall not again be competent until the said case has, in accordance with the procedures of the tribunal, been withdrawn from before the tribunal or been declared abandoned.

The woman claimed that this article was in breach of her fundamental human rights and the country’s Constitution since she had the right to file any case before any tribunal she deems fit.

She called on the First Hall of the Civil Court to refer the matter to another court under the constitutional jurisdiction to hand down a judgement on this issue and take any action it deems fit in the circumstances.