THE ORDER <...>

b) The common law definition of marriage is declared to be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid to the extent that it does not permit same-sex couples to enjoy the status and the benefits coupled with responsibilities it accords to heterosexual couples.

c) The omission from section 30(1) of the marriage Act 25 of 1961 after the words “or husband” of the words “or spouse” is declared to be inconsistent with the Constitution, and the Marriage Act is declared to be invalid to the extent of this inconsistency.

d) The declarations of invalidity in paragraphs(b) and (c) are suspended for 12 months from the date of this judgment to allow Parliament to correct the defects.

e) Should Parliament not correct the defects within this period, Section 30(1) of the Marriage Act 25 of 1961 will forthwith be read as including the words “or spouse” after the words “or husband” as they appear in the marriage formula.

Full ruling: http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/uhtbin/hyperion-image/J-CCT60-04

News coverage:
http://tinyurl.com/95tdt

http://tinyurl.com/eyc8z

[ 01 December 2005: Message edited by: RealityBites ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:
Yay! Bloody well YAY!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghost of the Navigator:
They still have laws in the book from 1961 in South Africa?

---

Canada still has the Indian Act on the book....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ghost of the Navigator:
They still have laws in the book from 1961 in South Africa?

---

Why not? Even if a country has a revolution, they don't throw out all the old laws.

The act in question "provides for the solemnization of marriages, the designation of marriage officers, revocation of designations, objections to marriage, prohibition of marriages, the formulary to be used in soleminizing marriages, and matters incidental thereto."