I therefore reject the petition for nullity under section 11(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. On the 24th February 1996 the Petitioner, whom I shall call "the husband", and the Respondent, whom I shall call "the wife", went through a ceremony of marriage at the Registry office in Taunton Deane; their marriage certificate is at A2-266.At the time of the marriage the husband was aged 45 and the wife was aged 35; the certificate describes the condition of both of them as 'previous marriage dissolved'. The husband contends that the marriage is void under section 11(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 on the grounds that, at the time of the marriage to the wife, she was already lawfully married.the fourth report appears before the third report in the bundle), 27th June 2006 (A6-1179) and 14th July 2006 (A6-1189).During the hearing I rejected an application by Mr Tolson QC that he should be permitted to cross examine Mr Turek on the 'decision making process' of the Queen's Proctor.11.That contention is based upon the fact that the wife had previously married a man ('Etsuo') in Japan on 2nd November 1982; the husband contends that her marriage to Etsuo should be treated as subsisting since the form of divorce that was made in Japan relating to that marriage should not be recognised in this country.4.All parties accept that the marriage to Etsuo should be recognised as valid under the domestic law of England and Wales. Documentation has been produced that shows that her marriage to Etsuo was ended by divorce in Japan on 27th February 1985 (A2- 262 and A2- 263).That petition is dated 8th March 2005 and contains the following pleading: 'The Respondent was lawfully married in Japan to Etsuo .
No advocate at any stage of these proceedings has been able to find any domestic or foreign authority outside Japan that considers the kyogi rikon.Under Article 739 of that code, the divorce becomes effective by notification in accordance with the provisions of the [Japanese] Family Registration Law.