Dear Mrs Macaulay,

I am an attorney. I have a situation where the civil marriage officer who conducted a marriage in a resort in Jamaica is not properly registered with the Registrar General’s Department and thus the marriage is not valid. The hotel engaged the marriage official as a part of the wedding package they sold the couple. Is this actionable in Jamaica? Who should I direct the case to be reviewed by? The couple was “married” last year and have now learned they are not married at all.

I am very grateful for your letter, as it enables me to deal with the issue you have raised on behalf of your clients.  Let me first say that I am very upset that because of a lack of care by the hotel in engaging the person they did as a marriage officer, that your clients must be really devastated, hurt, inconvenienced, their plans for a happy wedding spoiled, and have suffered financial loss in that their specially planned dream wedding ended up being a farce and void because of the unlawful and fraudulent act of the so-called ‘civil marriage officer’.

This person conducted their wedding ceremony, passing himself/herself off as a duly appointed marriage officer, and issued a worthless piece of paper to them instead of a properly certified marriage certificate.

Marriages in Jamaica fall within the provisions of the Marriage Act 1897, and as amended. It is provided therein that civil registrars of marriages are ex officio marriage officers, and they as well as marriage officers are appointed by the minister, who can also remove them at his or her pleasure.  These appointments and removals, resignations, or the vacating of offices by civil registrars and marriage officers, must be published in the Gazette, and shall all take effect from the date of their publication as provided in section 5 of the Act.

A civil registrar of marriages must have a known office which must have been approved by the registrar general. They can only act as marriage officers when the parties getting married, after obtaining their certificate or licence, contract them to solemnise their marriage, which must be done in the presence of two witnesses, with open doors, and between the hours of 6:00 am and 8:00 pm, and they must make the declaration with the words appearing in section 27 of the Act; and no religious service can be used.

As you can now appreciate, we do not have “civil marriage officers” in Jamaica, as we only have civil registrars of marriages, who are also ex officio marriage officers, and marriage officers.  Legal, (civil) and non-religious marriages are solemnised by marriage officers, who may also be ministers of religion, and who only as marriage officers sign the marriage registers having solemnised a marriage.

Marriage officers are the ones who prepare and attest to the particulars of the parties and the place and parish that the marriage ceremony occurred, and by or before him or her, and enter his or her description as a marriage officer of the island of Jamaica, on the prescribed form of the marriage register (pursuant to section 31 of the Act). This shall also be signed by the bride and groom in the presence of their two (or more) witnesses, who shall also sign.  The marriage officer, after the ceremony is over, is legislatively bound to perform certain duties as provided in the Act in registering it in duplicate, and signing it, as must the two witnesses and the couple as stated above.

Then the marriage officer must, after such registration, separate the duplicate register from the marriage register book and immediately deliver the duplicate register to the registrar general and deliver a certified copy of the register to one of the parties to the marriage without charging any fee for this.

The engagement of the marriage officer by the hotel and this person’s services having been sold to the couple as part of their wedding package raises for me the question of negligence of the part of the hotel personnel in not carefully checking that the person they engaged was indeed duly appointed as a marriage officer of the island of Jamaica.  As your statement in that regard is rather sparse, I leave it to you as you have fuller facts, to consider whether the hotel’s action was indeed negligent and therefore actionable for the injury and loss which your clients suffered and which would make the hotel liable to them for their said loss and suffering in damages and a for any and all future costs to them of another wedding.

As to the individual who purported to act as the marriage officer, he or she has in my opinion committed offences pursuant to provisions in the Act.  First, the Director of Public Prosecutions must authorise the prosecution of offences which are punishable even on summary conviction under Section 57 of the Act.

By virtue of section 62, under the rubric “Offences” — included therein is the provision that whoever pretends to be or acts as a marriage officer though not authorised to so act, is guilty of a misdemeanour, unless he shows that he pretended or so acted because of a mistake of law or fact.  In your instant case, I do not see how the person could not know that they had not been appointed by the minister and that it had not been published in the Gazette.

Then in addition, under section 63, every marriage officer who issues any document or attests or certifies in writing that an event happened (the marriage ceremony), knowing this to be false in any material particular… according to his attestation or certificate, shall be liable to imprisonment for two years.  Clearly the attestation/certification as a marriage officer when he or she was not falls within this section.

Then we have section 68, which provides that any person who performs or as a marriage officer, who witnesses the ceremony of marriage, knowing that he/she is not duly qualified to do so, or that any of the matters required by law for the validity of such marriage has not happened or been performed, or that the marriage is void or unlawful on any ground, shall be liable to imprisonment for seven years.

Before I close, I wish to refer you to section 3 of the Act which deals with cases in which marriages are void. It states that if both parties to a marriage knowingly and wilfully agree to the solemnisation of their marriage ceremony being done (a) by or before a person who is not a marriage officer, or (b) it is done without the presence of the two witnesses – it shall be void.

The requirement of a properly appointed and the publication of the appointment in the Gazette of the person as a marriage officer is fundamental to the conduct of a valid marriage and anyone passing themselves off as being one and so acting, commits offences under the Act.

I would suggest that you write your complaint/allegations to the registrar general and copy it to the Director of Public Prosecutions, strongly requesting that the matter be scrupulously investigated and the person be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law as the Act provides.

As to claiming against the hotel for damages, you would need the assistance of local representation to assist you with this after you have decided to pursue this.  I opine that you should, but you are better placed to decide about this.

I suggest that you, as a fellow attorney to go onto the Laws of Jamaica website and obtain a copy of the Marriage Act so that you can peruse it yourself.  It is a short Act, and you can refer particularly to sections 3, 5, 7, 14, 27, 28, 31, 48, 49, 50, 55, 57, 62, 63, 68 and Prescribed Form — Schedule L-Marriage Register.

I trust that I have assisted you and your clients to deal with their matter and I fervently hope that it is all resolved to their satisfaction.

Margarette May Macaulay is an attorney-at-law, Supreme Court mediator, notary public, and women’s and children’s rights advocate. Send questions via e-mail to allwoman@jamaicaobserver.com
Mrs Macaulay cannot provide personal responses.