Same Sex Marriage- Supreme Court Hearing- DAY 7 Live Updates

AG: This is a judgement of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. This is post Ghaidan. Please see a few paragraphs.

AG: It also looks at the other aspects of what happens within such unions and associations.

AG: I have also placed on record this article where the author not only looks at the fundamental misconceptions and reluctance to accept emerging institutions of marriage, particularly it also looks at Ghadian, marriage, home, spouse etc.

CJI: You have emphasised that there was a lot of consultative process, deliberation.

Justice Bhat: In a way, this was put to us- this act was preceded by Civil Partnership Act of 2004 so social process of assimilation worked out through parliamentary process.

AG: No vaccum can be attributed to the SMA. Absence of reference to all possible unions of persons as marriage cannot be construed as a legal and a constitutional omission.

AG: It's not a Vishakha simplistic statement. The course adopted in Vishakha cannot be replicated here both for doctrinal and practical reasons.

CJI DY Chandrachud: And you're saying that this would not just involve tweaking of this law but the whole host of legislations. You've formulated it very succinctly.

CJI DY Chandrachud: And you're saying that this would not just involve tweaking of this law but the whole host of legislations. You've formulated it very succinctly.

CJI DY Chandrachud: So you've dealt with also the argument of inclusion that the fact that the SMA was intended to be a special law in the context of conventional institution of marriage...but same sex couples weren't intended to be a part of this law.

AG: In SMA, the law is not ex facie or unconstitutional. Therefore, the question of reading down doesn't arise.