RootsChat.Com

I agree with the first translation, with the exception of petentin being petitioner rather than patient

for the other document

Archdiocese of KOLN                 KOLN the 11th of oct 1921

                       FINAL MEETING

in the matter of matrimony schaub vs.hausmann on tuesday the 11th of october 1921 the fourth hour after midday

under the chairmanship of the official revered lord prelates canon (dr. steffend) are to present the subpeona to the associated judge(s)

1. decant pastor msgr. dr. Sasse in Dusseldorf
2. canon msgr. Richen Aachen

the ----- vicar dr. Scholl, Koln, Burgmauer    Ehevorteitdiger? marriage lawyer?
and the undersigned secretary Muhe, koln, machabaer street 40

                           THE ORDER OF THE DAY
in the case of schaub vs hausmann "the consensus is marriage is null and void"
after reading the papers of the judge(s), the discussion of the judge(s), the -------?
of the (marriage lawyer?) all are unanimously in agreement following the judgement

                          in the name of the holy trinity
of Christine Getrude Hausmann 'catholic confession', with heinrich schaub 'not catholic confession' on the 16 of nov 1912 to Offenbach civil contracted marriage-----
there was a lack of willingness to marry from the reasons from (reference numbers)
it is declared annuled

Shopping done ... I've time now for another look.

A resumeé rather than word for word translation:


According to the sworn statements of the witnesses - the (female) patient, the mother and the sister, the civil marriage took place on 16th. Nov. 1912 in Offenbach  on the explicitly expressed agreement, that a a church marriage would follow. The defendant Heinrich Schaub denies this in his statement from 14th March 1920, but this cannot be taken into account because
a) he has refused to be sworn in (not taken under oath)
b) he is not willing to make a statement about the marriage relationship to his wife
c) due to head wounds (shot in the head) his memory is "very limited"  and
d) into the bargain, he doesn't actually know, whether he was married in a church.

The brother's testimony can be ignored, as they don't seem to have to him about it .
Perhaps because he was often absent, and was also a 'frivolous' person.

The Wife didn't consider the civil marriage to be a real marriage, and considered herself to be living in the sin of concubinage.
:
The patient hadn't intended to marry on the 16th Nov "hic et nunc" [here and now].

The unanimous vote is therefore
 matrimonium fuisse nullum ab defeetum consensus


[Google translation: Marriage was no consent from defeetum]
Maybe someone with latin kowledge will translate this better, it's probably a "boiler-plate" statement for such cases.

Bob