A French woman has won a landmark case at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) after being blamed for her divorce for refusing to have sex with her husband. The unanimous ruling from the ECHR concluded that French courts violated the woman’s right to privacy and family life under European human rights law, ending a legal battle that spanned nearly a decade.
The woman, identified as Ms. H.W., hailed the decision as a victory for personal autonomy and consent in marriage. “This is a step forward in ending rape culture within marriage and acknowledging the importance of consent,” she said in a statement.
Ms. H.W., who resides in Le Chesnay near Paris, married her husband, identified as J.C., in 1984. The couple had four children, including one with a disability who required constant care. The marriage began deteriorating after the birth of their first child, and by 1992, Ms. H.W. developed health problems. Over the years, she experienced physical and verbal abuse from J.C. In 2004, she stopped having sexual relations with her husband and eventually filed for divorce in 2012.
While she did not contest the divorce itself, she opposed the grounds on which it was granted—specifically, her refusal to engage in marital relations. French courts upheld the husband’s complaint, citing her actions as a violation of “marital duties.”
In 2019, an appeals court in Versailles ruled against her, a decision later upheld by the French Court of Cassation. Frustrated by the French judiciary’s stance, Ms. H.W. brought her case to the ECHR in 2021.
The ECHR ruled that marital duties cannot override the right to consent, emphasizing that governments should only intervene in personal matters under extraordinary circumstances. The court stated, “Marriage does not imply automatic consent to sexual relations. Suggesting otherwise risks normalizing marital rape as a non-criminal act.”
The ruling has sparked significant debate in France over outdated marital norms and the legal concept of “marital duty.” Women’s rights advocates applauded the judgment as a vital step toward modernizing views on marriage and addressing systemic inequality.
Lilia Mhissen, Ms. H.W.’s lawyer, described the decision as a “dismantling of archaic stereotypes” and a call for French courts to align with contemporary understandings of equality and consent.
Feminist groups supporting H.W. criticized French courts for perpetuating harmful stereotypes about women’s roles in marriage. “This case reinforces the urgent need for legislative reforms to ensure consent is central to all relationships, including marriage,” said a spokesperson.
The ruling comes amidst heightened attention to issues of consent and marital abuse in France. High-profile cases, such as Dominique Pélicot’s conviction for drugging and facilitating the rape of his wife by multiple men, have further underscored the gaps in French legal protections.
French lawmakers are now being urged to revise outdated laws. A recent parliamentary report recommends redefining rape to explicitly incorporate the absence of consent as its foundation, affirming that consent must be freely given and can be withdrawn at any time.
Ms. H.W.’s case represents a turning point in how marital relationships are perceived under the law. By emphasizing the primacy of consent, the ECHR has paved the way for broader discussions on gender equality, personal rights, and the need to combat systemic biases embedded in traditional marital norms.
