A High Court judge yesterday suggested the legislature should "consider seriously the abolition or restructuring of the crime of bigamy".
Mr Justice Kinlen issued the advice when granting a civil annulment of her first marriage to a woman who got a church annulment of the same marriage in 1977.
The woman had a job in a Christian Brothers' college where, the judge said, she became very friendly with one brother who assisted her in applying for a papal annulment of her first marriage.
That brother later left the order and married the woman and they had two daughters. The couple's relationship has since broken up.
The woman applied for a civil nullity of her first marriage to regularise her position under civil law and to have her status and that of her children clarified.
Granting her application yesterday, Mr Justice Kinlen said the woman when she was 17 did not realise she had become pregnant by a 20-year-old boyfriend, who was a heavy drinker and unemployed.
She received no sex education and her parents gave no practical support or advice. It was suggested by her sister that she could have an abortion; have the child in England and put it up for adoption; or marry the boyfriend.
She was afraid to tell her parents and was aware of the terrible shame brought on her family. When she did tell her parents, they did not want her married in a local church so they went to a church run by a religious order.
Her first husband continued to have affairs with other women and apparently had at least six children from these affairs.
At the time of the first marriage, the judge said, the woman did not understand fully that marriage was supposed to be for life but saw it simply as a solution to a problem at the time. She felt she had no way out and was forced into the marriage.
Her parents made it clear she had to get married and refused generally to communicate with or help her. "She was a pregnant child, who was ignorant and alone," he said. Having heard all the evidence, Mr Justice Kinlen said he was firmly of the opinion that, at the crucial time, the woman was not capable of making a full and totally free and informed decision.
The judge added that during the hearing of the case (which was in camera), he had pointed out it appeared the second marriage was possibly bigamous and he therefore had to consider whether or not to impound the papers and send them to the DPP.
As he had decided the first marriage was a nullity, the question of bigamy was "probably an interesting academic discussion". The original marriage, being void, could not be the basis for a bigamy prosecution.
In view of the confusion which existed in relation to the law of bigamy, he did not propose sending the matter to the DPP, the judge said. The DPP was a totally independent officer and it was not appropriate for the court to direct the DPP in what he should or should not do.
The woman's application for civil annulment nearly 30 years after her first church marriage was due to "a much later realisation that the church annulment does not change her status in civil law and her wish to have her status and the status of her subsequent marriage and family clarified."
The judge said a 1946 article by barrister Gerard Lee in the 1946 Irish Ecclesiastical Record "shows clearly that there is a serious conflict between the civil law and the Roman Catholic canon law."
In view of the confused state of case law and the fact that most people regarded bigamy as a medieval crime no longer committed, he "respectfully suggested that the legislature should consider seriously the abolition or restructuring of the crime of bigamy".