Long overdue, life-changing or frivolous? Your thoughts on wedding rule changes

The day Sam and Courtney Scholey became husband and wife didn't feel like their wedding day.

There was no walking down the aisle, no rings exchanged, no wedding dress, and no music.

That all came several days later, when the pair had a bespoke ceremony led by a celebrant who knew them, at a venue in the Oxfordshire countryside. It was their dream wedding - but it wasn't legal in England and Wales.

And so in April, they forked out hundreds of pounds to quietly sign papers at a library in Buckingham.

"For us, that day was as insignificant as possible," Courtney told the BBC. "It was just the words we had to say to make it legally binding."

The Scholeys are one of a growing number of couples who feel the rigid rules around weddings are making getting married more stressful, more expensive and less meaningful.

But under new proposals announced this month - described by the government as the biggest shake-up of wedding laws in 200 years - couples in England and Wales could have the freedom to hold official marriage ceremonies in a wider array of unconventional locations, from forests to beaches, as long as the location is approved by a registered officiant.

It's welcome news for Nicky Brown, who said she wants to exchange vows in a wildly picturesque corner of Wales, with just her mum and her partner's mum as witnesses.

"I'd be quite happy to get married in a field full of sheep," the 57-year-old told the BBC.

Currently, a marriage or civil partnership ceremony in England or Wales must take place at an approved venue to be legally binding – and many exert control on elements of the wedding such as vows, headcounts or music.

There are also tight restrictions on who can officiate a wedding and how. Authorised religious figures can, but – with few exceptions – only in places of worship.

Registrars can conduct a wedding, but it can't have any religious content. And celebrants can't legally marry people at all.