A Montreal man who took years to grant his wife a Get has taken the exceptional step of asking the Supreme Court to rehear his case and is challenging the constitutionality of a section of the Divorce Act that penalizes spouses who stand in the way of religious divorces.
The man’s lawyer argues the section is discriminatory because it targets the Jewish religion and it impinges on freedom of religion by breaching the boundary between church and state.
Should the court grant the request for a rehearing and then rule section 21(1) of the Divorce Act is unconstitutional, it could affect a number of religions.
However, even the lawyers involved acknowledge that the chances that will happen are slim. While asking the Supreme Court to rehear a case is exceptional, it is even more exceptional for the court to grant such requests.
Section 21(1) of the Divorce Act, adopted to address the problem of spouses who refuse to grant a religious divorce, allows the court to refuse to hear the case presented by one side if it refuses to remove impediments to the ex-spouse remarrying within their religion.
(Source: The Gazette)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
5 Responses
ehem, anyone know anything about this case
yes, it was written up a while ago
כי לא כצורנו צורם ואויבנו פלילים
the igros moshe is very clear on the fact that a woman who goes to court after the get, invalidates the get (the specific case mentioned is asking for more alimony)
#4 given the huge number of frum women who commence post judgment proceedings in the New York Supreme Court, after recieving their gittin, it’s fairly obvious that we don’t pasken according to the teshuva to which you refer, assuming it even says what you assert it says. Anine ever see any sort of public announcement that a Get is retroactively invalid becuase post judgment proiceedings were commenced? I never have.