There was once a right to sue for breach of promise to marry. While this historic right may offend modern mores and morals, could it, or a version of it, if reinstated, provide a remedy to a current marital issue, namely, the protection of parties married in non-qualifying ceremonies?
A typical example would be a couple married in a Muslim nikah who do not subsequently wed in a registry office and therefore do not satisfy the requirements of English law.
Nazia Rashid ponders this fascinating question, assesses the pros and cons and surveys some case law and marriage history, in this week’s NLJ.
Rashid writes: ‘Prior to the reform of the law in 1970, the legal status of a promise to marry was just like any other valid agreement. Therefore, if one party, and typically the fiancé, without lawful excuse failed to honour the agreement to marry his fiancée, he, the defendant, would be liable to pay damages to the plaintif.’
RELATED ARTICLES
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=3f38efa6_1)
