Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Man sued for getting cold feet (twice)
StaedlerMars:
But an oral contract is in no way a legitimate contract that the state has any power to enforce. It's none of their business, and the fact that they feel they can hand out fines for personal problems is worrying.
If the woman was silly enough to toss everything over board, twice, for the same man, she can't blame him for her rash actions. The fact that it was the second time gives her less of a right to the money.
snalin:
--- Quote from: Anyways on 26 Jul 2008, 14:54 ---But it's not a fraud! Unless he gets off on dumping women after getting engaged with them there is no logical reason why he would propose to her in the first place. Should you be punished with gigantic fines for having second thoughts about the person you are spending the rest of your life with?
--- End quote ---
Sorry, I was unclear, that was an example. This isn't fraud, it's more making a promise you can't keep, and end up ruining parts of someones life because of it.
Oli:
--- Quote from: StaedlerMars on 26 Jul 2008, 21:54 ---But an oral contract is in no way a legitimate contract that the state has any power to enforce. It's none of their business, and the fact that they feel they can hand out fines for personal problems is worrying.
If the woman was silly enough to toss everything over board, twice, for the same man, she can't blame him for her rash actions. The fact that it was the second time gives her less of a right to the money.
--- End quote ---
The first part of your post is right on the money, but I would say she can blame him for the monetary losses she incurred. The state shouldn't have a part in that though.
Luke C:
People have been trying this for years. In the UK at least a marriage licence is one of the most binding contracts you can ever sign. Under UK law however there is no protection for people who are engaged. That, under the law at least, is purely an intention to get married but not legally binding.
StaedlerMars:
--- Quote from: Oli on 27 Jul 2008, 09:18 ---
The first part of your post is right on the money, but I would say she can blame him for the monetary losses she incurred. The state shouldn't have a part in that though.
--- End quote ---
Granted, she can blame him, but my main issue with this lies with the involvement of the state.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version