Writing in NLJ this week, Imogen Mellor, barrister at 4PB, analyses Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council v EKK, where the court rejected arguments for a person-specific assessment. Although such an approach might appear intuitive, the court concluded it would amount to judicial 'spouse vetting' and risk excessive paternalism. Mellor explains that requiring judges to evaluate individual prospective spouses could create inconsistent decisions and impose unrealistic expectations on vulnerable people.
The ruling also reinforces the principle that making an unwise decision does not necessarily indicate a lack of capacity. While tensions remain between different capacity tests, particularly concerning contact and sexual relationships, the judgment provides welcome clarity that marriage continues to be assessed by reference to the legal status itself, rather than the qualities of a proposed partner.
