– The Court of Appeal has held that where a Marriage Certificate is produced for the purpose of establishing a marital status in an administrative matter, such certificate constitutes prima facie proof of the existence of the marriage, and accordingly, no administrative authority or officer has the power to determine the validity or invalidity of such marriage in the absence of a decree or declaration issued by a competent court.

The ruling was delivered by the Court of Appeal Bench comprising Justice Dhammika Ganepola and Justice Adithya Patabendige while determining a writ application filed before the Court.The Court observed that the determination of the validity, nullity or dissolution of a marriage falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of a competent court, namely the Family Court (District Court) and therefore, in the absence of a judicial declaration to the contrary, a Marriage Certificate is sufficient at the initial stage to establish a person’s marital status.This writ application was filed by a petitioner, Ashila Ranasinghe of Galenbindunuwewa, Anuradhapura, naming the Land Commissioner General, the Inter Provincial Land Commissioner of Anuradhapura and the Divisional Secretary of Galenbindunuwewa as Respondents.

The case arose after the petitioner sought to obtain long-term lease rights over two State lands which had earlier been possessed and maintained by his father and stepmother.According to the facts presented before Court, the petitioner’s father had first married in 1973 and later entered into a second marriage in 1984. The second wife had obtained approval for long-term State land leases. After her death, the petitioner’s father had also been granted approval relating to the same lands.

Following the petitioner’s father’s death, the petitioner continued occupying and maintaining the lands and later applied to obtain the lease rights.However, the authorities later refused to proceed with the lease process after raising questions about whether the petitioner’s father had legally divorced his first wife before entering into the second marriage. Since there was no proof of divorce available to the Petitioner as his mother too is no more,  the authorities took the position that the second marriage may not have been legally valid and decided to cancel earlier approvals given to Petitioner’s father.

The Court of Appeal held that the respondent authorities had acted outside their legal powers by attempting to determine the validity of a marriage.Justice Adithya Patabendige observed that “the determination of the validity, nullity, or dissolution of a marriage is a matter that falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of a court of competent jurisdiction,” and not within the powers of administrative authorities.

Referring to the Section 52 of the Marriage Registration Ordinance, the Justice Patabendige further stated that: “A Certificate of Marriage constitutes prima facie proof of the existence of such a marriage.”

Justice Adithya Patabendige also referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Hudson Samarasinghe v. Thilaka Wadasinghe Liyanarathnage (S.C. Appeal No. 22/2020), recently delivered by Justice Achala Wengappuli, and observed that a marriage evidenced by a Marriage Certificate remains valid in law unless and until it is set aside by a decree of nullity issued by a competent court.

Accordingly, the Court of Appeal held that the Respondents had acted without jurisdiction in questioning the validity of the second marriage of the Petitioner’s father and that the impugned administrative decisions were therefore ultra vires, unlawful and liable to be quashed.

Accordingly, the Court of Appeal issued writs quashing the decisions taken by the authorities and further directed the Respondents to conduct a fresh inquiry in compliance with the principles of natural justice.

The Court also specifically ordered that the Respondents refrain, either directly or indirectly, from inquiring into or determining the validity or invalidity of the second marriage between petitioner’s father in the absence of a decree of nullity or other declaration issued by a competent court.

Attorney at Law Shehan Chamika Silva appeared for the Petitioner with Radhya Herath AAL, Ama S. Jayaweera AAL and Indika Hettiarachchi Law Associates. (CA (Writ) Application 0542/2025)