|
''Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Fourie and Another; Lesbian and Gay Equality Project and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others'', () ZACC 19,〔2006 (1) SA 524 (CC).〕〔Case Nos CCT 60/04, CCT 10/05.〕 is a landmark decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa in which the court ruled unanimously that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The judgment, authored by Justice Albie Sachs and delivered on 1 December 2005, gave Parliament one year to pass the necessary legislation. As a result the Civil Union Act came into force on 30 November 2006, making South Africa the fifth country in the world to recognise same-sex marriage. The case was heard on May 17, 2005, by Langa ACJ, Madala J, Mokgoro J, Moseneke J, Ngcobo J, O'Regan J, Sachs J, Skweyiya J, Yacoob J and Van Der Westhuizen J. MTK Moerane SC (with S. Nthai) appeared for the applicants, P Oosthuizen (with T Kathri) for the respondents, JJ Smyth QC for the first and second ''amici curiae'', GC Pretorius SC (with DM Achtzehn, PG Seleka and JR Bauer) for the third ''amicus curiae'', DI Berger SC (with F Kathree) for the applicants, and M Donen SC for the respondents. In the ''Fourie'' case, the applicants' counsel was instructed by the State Attorney, and the respondents' by M. van den Berg. The third ''amicus curiae'' was instructed by Motla Conradie. In the ''Lesbian and Gay Equality Project'' case, the applicants' counsel was instructed by Nicholls, Cambanis & Associates, and the respondents' by the State Attorney. The case concerned applications for leave to appeal and cross-appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal (the ''Fourie'' case) coupled with an application for direct access to the Constitutional Court (the ''Lesbian and Gay Equality Project'' case). == Legal background == The definition of marriage in South African common law is drawn from the Roman-Dutch law, and until the ''Fourie'' case it was described as "a union of one man with one woman, to the exclusion, while it lasts, of all others".〔''Mashia Ebrahim v Mahomed Essop'' 1905 TS 59 (8 March 1905), Supreme Court of the Transvaal〕 This definition excluded same-sex unions; it also excluded polygamous or potentially polygamous unions like Muslim marriages and marriages under African customary law. The Marriage Act,〔Act 25 of 1961.〕 the statute which regulates the formalities of the marriage ceremony, does not make any explicit mention of the genders of the spouses. However, section 30(1) of the act (as substituted by the Marriage Amendment Act, 1973) requires the marriage officer to ask each party to the marriage: "Do you, ''A.B.'', declare that as far as you know there is no lawful impediment to your proposed marriage with ''C.D.'' here present, and that you call all here present to witness that you take ''C.D.'' as your lawful wife ''(or husband)''?" and thereupon the parties shall give each other the right hand and the marriage officer concerned shall declare the marriage solemnized in the following words: "I declare that A B and C D here present have been lawfully married. The courts understood the use words "wife (or husband)" to require that the spouses must be a man and a woman. The Interim Constitution which came into force in April 1994, and the final Constitution which replaced it in February 1997, both prohibit unfair discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Section 9 of the final Constitution provides as follows: (1) Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law. Section 10 of the Constitution provides that "everyone has inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity respected and protected." 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Minister of Home Affairs v Fourie」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|