header-logo header-logo

22 October 2021 / Nazia Rashid
Issue: 7953 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

I now pronounce you…

61708
Nazia Rashid considers whether reinstating breach of promise to marry could fill a gap in the law

Could reinstating the right to sue for breach of promise to marry assist couples in non-qualifying ceremony marriages?


Do we need to re-look at the abolished right to sue for breach of promise to marry?

I recently came across a tweet which referred to reforming family law by re-introducing ‘breach of promise’ as a remedy in ‘non qualifying ceremony’ cases, on protection for parties in religious marriages promised a legally binding ceremony gone unfulfilled. (Family Law Reform Now: Twitter 09/09/21 15:45.)

My legal mind, and I am sure for many family lawyers, headed straight to the case of Akhter v Khan [2018] EWFC 54. However, at the same time, I thought of friends who have previously been in committed relationships which have broken down, and at least one party felt he/she still had a choice as to whether to proceed with the civil marriage or not regardless of what might have taken place following

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll