Key facts of the case - The applicant had divorced her wife; they both were Jewish and he refused to deliver the get to his wife. She brought an action for damages. The husband was condemned by the court of appeal of Rennes. Before the Court of cassation, he argues that he does not fall within the competence of civil courts to decide of the consequences of the indissoluble dimension of a religious marriage and that this amounts to a violation of the separation between Church and State.

Main reasoning of the court - The court of cassation notes that the court of appeal rightly asserted that it does not belong to civil courts to assess the motivation of the granting or refusal of a get. However, it holds that civil courts are entitled to determine whether this refusal amounts to an abuse of rights. In addition, the court of cassation holds that by divorcing, the spouses intended to totally end their marriage. By refusing the deliverance of the get, the husband maintains the religious matrimonial link only and thus restraints the freedom his wife was entitled to expect from divorce. The refusal thus amounts to an abuse of rights.

See the decision: 1988-06-15 - Court of cassation, n. 86-15.476.