The law in the Marriage Bill 2013 requiring persons to pay damages for breach of promise to marry is a paper tiger. It is weak, loose, and largely unenforceable. Seducers and Don Juans can walk away free. Section 76 of the Bill provides that damages may be recoverable by a party that suffers a loss when the other party dishonours a promise to marry. But other sections of the Bill render section 76 mostly ineffective. Many cases of breach of promise that commonly occur involve married men. Section 11 effectively nullifies compensation in such cases. It states that a person is incompetent to marry by reason of a subsisting marriage. The section does not distinguish between a civil or Christian marriage, which is closed, and a customary marriage, which is open to new entrants. So if a married man makes a promise to marry, that promise has no legal effect. In common law, however, if the woman was unaware that the man was married when the promise was made, she may still recover damages. But section 76 does not provide for such exceptions. There are five other conditions in
Posted on: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 08:41:32 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015