(Cann.1671-1692 Canon Law Code)

With the premise that that this is a basic summary for the layman with no pretense of accuracy, even as far as the terminology is concerned, nor this summary shall be exhaustive to any extent, our aim here is only to provide to the beginners a sort of “map” of the journey that awaits those who begin a cause for invalidity. The fellows canonists will hopefully forgive.

Another general premise is that a cause for invalidity is about finding the truth¹. It is therefore appropriate, before undertaking this research, and then start the cause, to assess carefully whether or not it is evidence based, leading to the conclusion that the marriage is void. That said, we can certainly get started.

Jurisdiction to hear the nullity of marriage belongs, at first instance, to the Court of the place where he married. In certain cases the jurisdiction of the Court may be the place of residence (i.e. of those who started the case) or the defendant (who suffers the case) or the Court of the place where you can find most of the evidence. In special cases there may be called a shift of responsibility to the Apostolic Signatura.

The case begins with a written document (the petition) in which the party who believes his marriage was null briefly outlines the reasons that lead to that conclusion. The petition is filed with the Court together with the necessary documents. The Court, once formed, then decides whether to admit the petition, namely whether there is a minimum of reason in the application, and states that the  preliminary investigation phase  may start, namely the stage of collecting evidence. The parties (the couple) are then called before the Court to be questioned on the facts which are relevant to the investigation about the nullity. The Court then proceeds to the hearing of witnesses and – only in specific cases (impotence and psychological issues) – an expert enquiry  is undertaken.

Once the preparatory stage is done, the Court invites the parties to pursue its defenses. Once the discussion of the case is done, the decision is retained by the Court, which shall act in college composition. It should be clear that the Defender of the Bond needs to participate, i.e. an officer of the Court which shall furnish all reasonable evidence to defend the validity of the marriage. If the Court shall issue a decision  favorable to the nullity (the sentence is then called “affirmative”) the case will automatically switch on appeal. The dossier of the case is then sent to the Court of Appeal authority that will review the file. If the Court of Appeal agrees with the work of the Court of First Instance it then confirms the ruling by decree and then the marriage will be declared invalid. This means that for the Church that the marriage never existed and therefore the couple will move to a new marriage.

In the event the Court of Appeals does not agree with the Court of First Instance and then considers the need to review the case, a new pre-trial phase will be issued, at the end of which there will be a new ruling. If this will declare the marriage void, it will comply with the judgments that the canon law requires to move to a new marriage, otherwise you will have to appeal.

The third possibility is that the Court of First Instance decides negatively ( “not aware of the nullity of marriage”). In this case those who have an interest to establish the invalidity will appeal.

The appeal may be brought before the Court or Ecclesiastical authority or directly to the Roman Rota.

Obviously, the one dashed here is the usual process of annulment. There can occur several other hypotheses, but it is obvious that any legal issues which have arisen during the proceedings for revocation will be of relevance for the lawyer, which will advise on the best way to choose to get to the truth. Here comes the peculiarity of the causes of invalidity. How to reach a precise knowledge as close as possible to the truth about their marriage. This means – sometimes – having to acknowledge that their marriage, however short or unhappy is not null and one is given to live with this awareness. There is infact no “right” to the ruling of nullity, but only the right to appeal to the Court to ascertain the truth. The task of the lawyer will be to consider the matter carefully before introducing the cause, check to see if there is a solid base of truth and on whether it is possible to achieve the test. To introduce or continue a case of unfounded invalidity without any chance of success is – in my humble opinion – a serious behavior.

1 See the speech of the currently reigning pontiff, His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Roman Rota, 27 January 2007