Report comment

Michael Stannard - the subsequent marriage would be void, as the party would not have been free to marry.

If you look at the judgment, the parties were served notice by the Proctor to show cause why the decrees should not be set aside, so they did have the opportunity to have a say - it is possible that had they done so they could have argued against the decrees being set aside. They will of course be able to re-start proceedings and may of course have a claim against Mr Bhatoo to recover any losses they have suffered.

It reads as though the respondent's may not have been aware of the proceedings .