Court Ruling on Freedom of Expression vs Duty of Fidelity

Extract

[...] Does this statement, in your opinion, have an impact on the nature of the duty of fidelity? An impact on the notion of public order in marriage? Yes, the Court of Cassation's statement has an impact on the nature of the duty of fidelity, it discredits it and asserts that infidelity is no longer a crime, it has even become common in many marital regimes. It would only concern the private sphere, the relationship between the two spouses. - Have the personal duties of marriage lost their juridicality in your opinion? [...]

[...] - How do you analyze the evolution of the duty of fidelity? In relations with third parties? In the relationships between spouses? The duty of fidelity has indeed evolved over time, and I think that the evolution of common thought on marriage, liberalizing relationships, is accompanied by the decline of religion in our society. The law is a mirror of society, which evolves, customs also, so it is in this logic that the duty of fidelity is inscribed, which is less and less reprehensible. [...]

[...] This right includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authorities and regardless of frontiers.' - Why is freedom of expression opposed to the duty of fidelity? Freedom of expression is opposed to the duty of fidelity here because the advertisement would shock, according to the association, the religious convictions of some spectators by promoting adultery within married couples. Thus, the Court must ask itself if freedom of expression has limits. [...]

[...] - What are the sanctions for the violation of the duty of fidelity? As mentioned in the previous question, the 1975 law repealed articles 336 to 339 of the old Penal Code, thereby adultery is no longer considered a crime. In addition, adultery is no longer a cause for absolute divorce, but it can still be sanctioned in the context of a divorce for fault, the judge may thus pronounce the divorce at the exclusive fault of the spouse who committed adultery. [...]

[...] The judges of the Court of Cassation had to ask themselves if the imperative nature of the duty of fidelity justifies prohibiting an advertisement for a dating site that encourages adultery. The Court of Cassation responds negatively to the means that every person has the right to freedom of expression and that if spouses owe each other fidelity and if adultery constitutes a civil fault, it can only be usefully invoked by one spouse against the other in the context of a divorce procedure. The Court thus rejects the appeal as a result. [...]