Love 'not necessary for genuine marriage'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE ABSENCE of passion in an arranged marriage did not necessarily mean the relationship was contrived illegally to gain a Pakistani husband entry to the UK, a High Court judge said yesterday.
While the existence of 'passionate love' between a UK citizen and her foreign husband might help to persuade immigration authorities that the marriage was genuine, the absence of a love match did not of itself indicate, in the context of Muslim society, a 'marriage of convenience'.
Mr Justice Schiemann overruled an immigration appeal tribunal's decision not to allow Iram Iqbal, a 28-year-old shop assistant, to appeal against the Home Office's refusal to give her Pakistani husband, Tanveer, permission to live with her in this country.
Mrs Iqbal, of Battersea, south-west London, is now entitled to a full appeal tribunal hearing. Her husband originally asked to be allowed to join her six years ago and was refused entry in October 1988.
'The six-year wait is indicative of the couple's constancy and the slowness of our immigration and court procedures,' the judge said.
The adjudicator had failed to make clear his reasons for dismissing her appeal. He did not state whether he had taken account of the fact that this was a marriage between cousins in circumstances where such a marriage was traditional.
He gave the impression that he regarded the lack of overt affection as indicating that it was a marriage to secure the husband settlement in the UK. If that was his reasoning, it could be legitimately criticised.
The judge added: 'To draw an analogy with English society at the turn of the century, the fact that an American heiress was so keen to be a duchess that she was prepared to marry an Englishman whom she did not love would not lead one to suppose that the primary purpose of the marriage was for her to obtain admission to the UK. She may have been after his title and he after her money.'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments