A French woman who had stopped having sexual relations with her husband has won a landmark ruling from the European Court of Human Rights, which determined that she should not be blamed for their divorce.
The court, in a unanimous decision on Thursday, ruled that a refusal to engage in sexual relations should not be considered as fault in divorce proceedings.
The ECHR found that France violated the woman’s right to private and family life, as protected by European human rights law, bringing to an end a legal battle that had lasted nearly ten years.
The 69-year-old woman, referred to as Ms. H.W., celebrated the ruling as a significant step in challenging “rape culture” and promoting consent in marriage.
The case has sparked a debate in France about marital consent and women’s rights.
The woman’s lawyer, Lilia Mhissen, hailed the decision as a dismantling of the outdated concept of “marital duty” and called for French courts to adopt modern views on consent and equality.
Women’s rights advocates supporting Ms. H.W. argued that French judges continue to uphold an “archaic vision of marriage,” which reinforces harmful stereotypes.
Ms. H.W., who resides in Le Chesnay near Paris, married JC in 1984, and the couple had four children, including a daughter with a disability requiring constant care—a responsibility Ms. H.W. assumed.
Their relationship began to deteriorate after the birth of their first child, and by 1992, Ms. H.W. began facing health issues. In 2002, her husband began physically and verbally abusing her. Two years later, she ceased sexual relations with him and filed for divorce in 2012.
While Ms. H.W. did not contest the divorce, she objected to the grounds on which it was granted.
In 2019, an appeals court in Versailles rejected her objections and sided with her husband. France’s highest court, the Court of Cassation, dismissed her appeal without explanation. She subsequently took her case to the ECHR in 2021.
The ECHR ruling emphasized that government intervention in matters of sexuality should only occur for very serious reasons, and that French law’s notion of “marital duties” overlooked the significance of consent in sexual relations.
The court asserted that agreeing to marriage does not equate to consenting to sex in the future.
The decision underscored the severity of marital rape, asserting that framing it otherwise would deny its recognition as a serious crime.
This ruling comes amid increased attention to consent issues in France, following the notorious case of Dominique Pélicot, who drugged his wife and invited others to sexually assault her.
Pélicot and the 50 men involved were convicted last month, and the case has raised questions about how French law addresses consent.
Feminist groups have argued that the ECHR decision highlights the urgent need for reform in French laws and cultural attitudes.
A recent report by French MPs recommended including non-consent as a key component of the legal definition of rape, emphasizing that consent must be freely given and can be revoked at any time.
