Content deleted Content added
StarTrekker (talk | contribs) |
Mitch Ames (talk | contribs) Sentence case, per MOS:CAPS |
||
Line 94:
The ''Family Law Act 1975'' (Cth) replaced the previous faults-based [[divorce]] system with a [[no-fault divorce]] system, requiring only a twelve-month period of [[Marital separation|separation]].<ref name="cca"/> The 1970s saw a significant rise in the divorce rate in Australia.<ref name="saec"/> This change has been attributed to a change in social attitudes: having once been considered acceptable only if there were severe problems, divorce was now widely considered acceptable if it was the preference of the partners.<ref name="mare">{{cite book |title=Marriage and Relationship Education: What Works and How to Provide It |last=Halford |first=W. Kim |year=2011 |publisher=Guilford Press |page=13 |isbn=9781609181574 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VJpXAlcItKUC |accessdate=3 August 2013}}</ref>
In 2004, the Liberal [[Howard
Until the enactment of the 2004 amendment, there was no definition in the 1961 Act of "marriage", and the [[common law]] definition used in the English case ''[[Hyde v Hyde]]'' (1866) was taken as applicable.<ref>Hyde v. Hyde and Woodmansee [http://www.uniset.ca/other/ths/LR1PD130.html {L.R.} 1 P. & D. 130].</ref> The definition pronounced by Lord Penzance in the case was: "I conceive that marriage, as understood in Christendom, may for this purpose be defined as the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others".<ref>[http://webdb.lse.ac.uk/gender/Casefinaldetail.asp?id=1&pageno=4 ''Hyde v Hyde'' casenote] {{webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20140329005746/http://webdb.lse.ac.uk/gender/Casefinaldetail.asp?id=1&pageno=4 |date=2014-03-29 }}.</ref> The 2004 amendment also banned the recognition of same-sex marriages performed in a foreign country.<ref>The 2004 Amendment inserted 88EA "Certain unions are not marriages" into the 1961 Act.</ref> The definition of marriage was added to the wedding ceremony speeches as a monitum; without it, ceremonies would be considered invalid.<ref>{{cite news|title=Couples seek to bypass 'downer' legal passage in wedding vows|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-01/couples-seek-to-bypass-legal-passage-in-wedding-vows/6511234|accessdate=10 December 2017|work=ABC News|date=1 June 2015|language=en-AU}}</ref>
In 2009, the Labor [[Rudd
The 2014 ''Marriage Amendment (Celebrant Administration and Fees) Act'' amended the ''Marriage Act 1961'' in relation to celebrants and other issues.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2014A00025 | title=Marriage Amendment (Celebrant Administration and Fees) Act 2014 }}</ref>
| |||