Breaching the Promise of Marriage

Breaching the promise of marriage can be an expensive decision as the case that was decided before the Honorable Judge Mrs. Irit Cohen in the Jerusalem Court May 29, 2011 proved.

Mike and Carol (not their real names) met in 2006. Soon after that, they moved in together and Carol found out she was pregnant. They decided for an abortion but in January 2007 she was pregnant again so they decided to tie their lives together in a permanent and formal connection. They set the date of their wedding for March 29, 2007, reserved an event hall, paid an advance and sent invitations to 700 guests.

Eventually the wedding was canceled but each side has a different version about the wedding cancellation.

According to the Plaintiff (Carol), on March 22, 2007 the Defendant (Mike) sent her a text message informing her, without any explanation, that he was cancelling the wedding. The Defendant contends that the wedding was canceled because of the Plaintiff`s behavior and that he was the one carrying the various expenses for the wedding. He also claimed that the background for this case is the fact that he and the Plaintiff were fairly compatible up until a month before his eldest son was born.

It was clear to the court that their relationship had its ups and downs and they did not hide from the court the serious and various disagreements they were having in the past year.

Carol`s mother testified in court and brought up a recorded interview with one of the famous Israeli broadcasters Mr. Yossi Saiass trying to bring peace between the sides without success. The Honorable Judge thought that this interview was favorable to the Defendant`s version adding that:

"The evidence does not support the Defendant`s version that the Plaintiff decided without warning and without any notice for the cancellation of the wedding and I do not accept the version of this. I neither accept the Defendant`s version that the Plaintiff decided to cancel the wedding therefore taking her belongings from his house before the wedding was canceled. The impression is that the cancellation of the wedding was done by the Defendant and as a result of the conduct of both parties before cancellation, including arguments and fights between them".

As awarded by a court decision in the past, the promise of marriage is a binding contract and there is nothing in this kind of agreement which prevents the application of the laws of contracts on the couple`s relationship. It was further held by the courts that when both parties contributed to the damage, or breach of contract, a division of responsibility is the obvious result.

The Honorable Judge added in her decision:

"As I wrote above, the evidence shows that the behavior of both parties caused the violation (cancellation). However, given that it is not a new conduct between the parties or that the Defendant did not know or was unaware of this behavior when they decided to marry, the responsibility of the two is not equal, but the Defendant`s responsibility greater than that of the Plaintiff and as a result he must compensate the Plaintiff for the cancellation of the wedding, though not full compensation, which she would deserve if he had canceled the wedding just like that, for no reason, as it was claimed by her. As ruled: "The compensation for breach of promise of marriage should be very modest!"

The decision was made upon the description of the Plaintiff`s expenses as a result of the cancellation and her moral damages but as said before the Plaintiff was also responsible for the cancellation; the Honorable Judge awarded the plaintiff for 15,000 Shekels plus 4,000 in lawyer`s fees and courts expenses.

A word of wisdom:

Marriage is a "very serious business" as is the "wedding itself", which includes not only expenses but social and moral aspects. Everyone can make a mistake or a bad decision and try to amend it even if a cancellation of the wedding is the only solution.

The question is how to do it. It will be always advised to use a step-by-step strategy trying to make the decision a mutual decision and not a unilateral one by one of the parties.

If this cannot be reached by mutual agreement it is advised to consult a professional such as a lawyer or a Rabbi to try to make some monetary compromise, because in the end it will be all about money.

Sincerely,
 

Tzvi Szajnbrum, Attorney at Law