The Limits of Analogy in Establishing the Legal Consequences of a Fictitious Divorce
https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2024.211.6.046-056
Abstract
In the Russian and foreign family legal reality, the practice of inappropriate use of divorces has become widespread. With the general attention of law to fictitious legally significant phenomena in the context of normative uncertainty of the concept, signs and consequences of fictitious divorce, it is necessary to check and take into account the possibilities of analogy as a traditional means of filling legal gaps in private law regulation in relation to the problem of the lack of legislative regulation of the legal consequences of fictitious divorces. At the same time, the method of analogy can and should act not only as one of the objects of study, but also as a means of achieving a scientific result. The study raises and rejects the scientific hypothesis about the similarity of the normatively undefined consequences of the depravity of the causa of a fictitious divorce and the regulated consequences of a fictitious marriage. At the same time, the author shows the positive role of the analogy of law as part of the means of settlement and family law disputes and methods of countering unfair behavior in marriage dissolution without the purpose of its termination. The significance of the work is manifested in its ability to doctrinally support the legislator’s abstinence from direct normative consolidation of the criteria of fictitious divorce and its invalidity. At the same time, the article indicates the way to situationally overcome the uncertainty of the concept under consideration using the analogy of law.
About the Author
V. A. Mikryukov
Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Viktor A. Mikryukov, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of Business and Corporate Law
Moscow
References
1. Baranov VM, Repyev AG. General legal phenomenon «circumvent the law»: concept and relationship with related phenomena. Bulletin of the University of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation. 2023;5:39-46. (In Russ.).
2. Barham V, Devlin R, Yang J. A theory of rational marriage and divorce. European Economic Review. 2009;53:93106.
3. Bespalov YuF. Law of equity and a russian family: a sociolegal aspect. Family and Housing Law. 2019;2:6-11. (In Russ.).
4. Briddock A. It’s a sham? The changing definition of marriage of convenience. Counsel. 2018. Available at: https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/it%E2%80%99s-sham-the-changing-definition-of-marriage-ofconvenience.
5. Caiyu L. Fake marriages and divorces are damaging traditional values: experts. Available at: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/201707/1054531.shtml.
6. Damele G. Analogia Legis and Analogia Iuris: An Overview from a Rhetorical Perspective. Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy. Ribeiro H (ed.). Argumentation Library. 2014;25:243-256.
7. Filimonova IV. Fictitious divorce as a kind of fictitious family law states. Politika, gosudarstvo i pravo. 2014;11(35):52-58. (In Russ.).
8. Ilyina OYu. Judgment as the basis of family rights and responsibilities. Laws of Russia: Experience, Analysis, Practice. 2016;8:13-17. (In Russ.).
9. Jerskey BA, Panizzon MS, Jacobson KC, Neale MC, Grant MD, Schultz M, Eisen SA, Tsuang MT, Lyons MJ. Marriage and divorce: A genetic perspective. Personality and Individual Differences. 2010;49(5):473-478.
10. Keeley G. Spanish parents faking divorce to get children into best schools. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/mar/19/spain1.
11. Kogolovskiy IR. Fictitious states in family law. Jurist. 2008;5:20-23. (In Russ.).
12. Kornilova TV, Fedorova AV. Fictive marriage as a method of illegal immigration. Ius publicum et privatum: online scientific and practical journal of private and public law. 2022;4(19):87-96. (In Russ.).
13. Lagunova EA. Fictitious marriage and divorce: theory and practice. Siberian Law Herald. 2019;2:51-56. (In Russ.).
14. Marhesinis B, Unberath H, Johnson A. The German Law of Contract. A Comparative Treatise / forewords by Lord Bingham, G. Hirsch. 2nd ed. Oxford; 2006.
15. Nizamieva ON. The correlation between lawsuit on recognition as invalid of the act of civil status and claim on annulment of civil act record. Herald of Civil Procedure. 2021;6:140-153. (In Russ.).
16. Rivlin R. The Right to Divorce: Its Direction, and Why It Matters. International Journal of the Jurisprudence of the Family. 2013;4:133-157.
17. Smirenskaya EV, Anisimov AP. Legal counteraction to sham marriages in russia: trends and prospects. Family and Housing Law. 2021;6:19-22. (In Russ.).
18. Tanimov OV. The development of fictions in Modern times (the experience of Russia). History of the State and Law. 2014;16:52-56. (In Russ.).
19. Tarusina NN, Sochneva OI. About fictitiousness in the family legal sphere. Laws of Russia: Experience, Analysis, Practice. 2015;6:78-84. (In Russ.).
20. Temnikova NA. Cancellation of a civil record of marriage dissolution. Family and Housing Law. 2018;4:16-19. (In Russ.).
21. Ulbashev AKh. On fictitious divorce. Family and Housing Law. 2019;3:8-21. (In Russ.).
22. Weiss Y. Family Theory: Economics of Marriage and Divorce. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. 2nd Ed. 2015.
23. Wemyss G, Yuval-Davis N, Cassidy K. «Beauty and the beast»: Everyday bordering and «sham marriage» discourse. Political Geography. 2018;66:151-160.
24. Willick Marshal S. «Sham divorces», civil rights and family law experts. Nevada Family Law Report. 2010;23:(2):16.
25. Willis SJ. Family Law Economics, Child Support and Alimony Ruminations on Income: Part One. Florida Bar Journal. 2004;78(5):34.
Review
For citations:
Mikryukov V.A. The Limits of Analogy in Establishing the Legal Consequences of a Fictitious Divorce. Lex Russica. 2024;77(6):46–56. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2024.211.6.046-056
Views:
184
Email this article 