PROMISE TO MARRY

These are legal implications that arise when one party makes inferences or commit that commit them to marriage. Promises to marry can be enforced in particular circumstances, however they need not be in writing since they can be inferred.

Promises have to be proved and corroborated.

Woodman v. Woodman

The plaintiff sued to recover damages for breach of promise to marry; she used three letter evidence, i.e. one by herself, the second by her brother in law asking the defendant to make his position clear and third by the pastor where the plaintiff prayed.

The defendant did not answer any of those letters. The plaintiff averred that silence amounted to consent, she also relied on the fact that she picked a ring that belonged to the defendant but he had not asked for it.

The court did not find it satisfactory to amount to a promise and silence did not amount to acceptance. All circumstances must be looked into before judging a case.

Larok v. Obwoya

The defendant made a promise he didn’t honour on the material date. The plaintiff established a breach successfully that enabled her to obtain damages for emotional hurt and reduction of marriage chances.

However, it is important to note that promises to marry are not enforceable if they are against public policy.

Spiers v. Hunt

The defendant promised to marry the plaintiff on the death of his wife which was contrary to public policy.

Held, to hold such a contract enforceable is to introduce into social life an immoral principle and it is only in the most corrupt conditions of society that such an agreement could be tolerated as lawful.

Notwithstanding the above, there are two exceptions to this rule;

i. If the plaintiff can show she lacked knowledge

Shaw v. Shaw

The plaintiff was a widow when she met the deceased who claimed to be a widower and they agreed to marry, oblivious to the plaintiff, the wife of the deceased was alive at the time and on the demise of the deceased, the plaintiff learnt that they were not married and brought an action against the administrators of the estate of the deceased who pleaded limitation Act and contrary to public policy since the wife was still alive.

Held, promise to marry implied warranty that the deceased was in a position to do so which warranty continued throughout the deceased’s life time and the plaintiff’s right of action was not extinguished.

The plaintiff being unaware at all material times that the deceased was married, the court was not under duty to raise the question whether the promise to marry was unenforceable as contrary to public policy and the action was maintainable.

ii. If the promise to marry was made after decree nisi had been made;

Fender v. Mildmay

The respondent’s wife petitioned for a divorce due to the respondent’s adultery with the appellant. On two occasions after declaration of decree nisi but before declaration of decree absolute the respondent promised to marry the appellant, after declaration of decree absolute the respondent refused to marry the appellant.

Held, there was no rule of public policy which prevented the contract from being enforced. The enforcement of a contract is not against public policy unless it is likely to lead to an injurious action.

The whole position of married parties is changed and fixed not by a mere separation or lodging a petition for divorce, but by a pronouncement of decree nisi and the further period of waiting after the decree is imposed in the public interesting order to secure full disclosure before the court.

REMEDIES

Damages, i.e. general for hardship or injured feelings for example in Larok v. Obwoya, punitive (exemplary) and special damages i.e. demand for a return of a thing. Cohen v. Seller, the plaintiff demanded the return of the ring.