Despite the absence of 'conjugal duty' in law, French courts have historically interpreted Article 242 of the Civil Code to penalize partners for abstaining from sexual relations.

The court unanimously agreed that insisting on conjugal duties and the divorce ruling intruded upon H.W.'s privacy, sexual freedom, and bodily autonomy, acknowledging the moral harm she suffered.

In light of this ruling, French lawmakers have recommended revising the legal definition of rape to emphasize that consent must be freely given and can be revoked at any time.

This case highlights ongoing legal interpretations in France regarding marital obligations and the implications of sexual consent within marriage, especially as the country grapples with the concept of marital rape.

The ruling comes amid renewed discussions about women's rights in France, particularly following high-profile cases that have drawn attention to issues of consent and sexual violence.

Supporters of H.W. criticized French judges for perpetuating an 'archaic vision of marriage' that reinforces the notion of sexual servitude and undermines women's rights.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of a 69-year-old French woman, H.W., whose husband divorced her for refusing to have sex, emphasizing that such refusal cannot be deemed 'at fault'.

H.W. married in 1984 and has four children, including one with disabilities, which contributed to the strain in their relationship and led her to file for divorce in 2012 after enduring physical and verbal abuse.

This legal interpretation has been criticized by feminist groups, who argue that it undermines women's rights to consent and reinforces harmful stereotypes regarding marriage.

H.W.'s lawyer, Lilia Mhissen, stated that the recent decision challenges outdated concepts of marital duty and calls for modern views on consent and equality in French courts.

While the ECHR ruling does not change the outcome of H.W.'s divorce, it is expected to prevent similar judicial decisions in the future, effectively abolishing the notion of marital duty in French law.

She cited health issues and threats of violence from her husband as reasons for her lack of intimacy since 2004, arguing that the court's ruling against her was unjust.