Her marriage had been deteriorating for decades — marred, she said, by health problems and threats of violence. But when the woman filed for divorce, French courts deemed her at fault for refusing to have sex with her husband.
The case ignited a debate about attitudes toward consent and women’s rights in France, which advocates said highlighted the need for legal reform around nonconsensual sex within a marriage.
On Thursday, the 69-year-old French woman, known by her initials, H.W., won her appeal in Europe’s top human rights court, which unanimously sided with her, saying that refusal to engage in sexual relations could not be considered grounds for fault in divorce.
“The very existence of such a marital obligation ran counter to sexual freedom,” including the right to bodily autonomy and the government’s obligation to prevent sexual and domestic violence, the European Court of Human Rights said in its ruling.
“This victory is for all women who, like me, find themselves confronted with aberrant and unjust judicial decisions, calling into question their body integrity and their right to privacy,” the woman said in a statement Thursday.
H.W. and her husband were married in 1984; they subsequently had four children. After ceasing sexual relations, she petitioned for divorce in 2012.
In 2019, a French appeals court in Versailles cited her refusal to have sex as evidence that she was solely at fault for the divorce. When she appealed the decision to the Court of Cassation, France’s highest court, her bid was dismissed without any explanation.
Under French law, “divorce pour faute” or fault-based divorce can allow the aggrieved spouse to claim damages and compensation, financial or otherwise, from the spouse at fault.
The battle dragged on for more than a decade, as successive French courts upheld the ruling. When H.W. exhausted all legal avenues in France, she brought her case to the European Court of Human Rights in 2021, arguing that the French court’s decision was an unjust intrusion into her private life and a violation of her physical integrity.
The European Court of Human Rights, based in Strasbourg, France, adjudicates human rights violations by 46 member states of the Council of Europe, a body older than the European Union and its predecessor, the European Economic Community.
The international court Thursday said it could not identify “any reason capable of justifying this interference by the public authorities in the area of sexuality.” It emphasized that under French law, the idea of “marital duties” had ignored the issue of consent in sexual relations.
H.W.’s lawyer Lilia Mhissen celebrated the legal victory, saying she hoped the decision would mark “a turning point in the fight for women’s rights in France.”
“This decision marks the abolition of the marital duty and the archaic, canonical vision of the family,” she said in a statement.
Mhissen added that “it is now imperative that France … take concrete measures to eradicate this rape culture and promote a true culture of consent and mutual respect.”
In response to the ECHR’s ruling, French Justice Minister Gerald Darmanin told reporters Thursday, “Obviously, we will go in the direction of history and we will adapt our law.”
For many, the ruling brought back into the spotlight the landmark verdict in the case of Gisèle Pelicot, whose ex-husband, Dominique Pélicot, was convicted of drugging her and arranging for dozens of men to rape her over a decade.
Following that historic trial, the French Parliament released a report recommending that the concept of nonconsent should be included in the legal definition of rape. It reiterated that consent must be freely given and can be withdrawn at any time.
While some women’s rights advocates welcomed the ECHR’s ruling in H.W.’s case, others said it highlighted the need for urgent legal reform to ensure protection against sexual violence in the marital context.
Anne-Cécile Mailfert, president of the Women’s Foundation, praised the work of women’s organizations in advocating for legal reform, but said it was “a long road towards the liberation of women towards the free use of their bodies.”
“I welcome the decision of the ECHR in the face of an unfair and anachronistic decision by the Court of Appeal,” French Equality Minister Aurore Bergé wrote in a post on X.
“No woman belongs to her husband. Women are free. Free or not to have sexual relations,” she added.
