engagement ring

[neil_loves_marie]

is it true that if a man buys a woman an engagement ring and they split before they wed does the ring belong the man and can claim it back legally due to the significance of the ring??

this is what ive heard and would like it clarified off someone that may know about the law surrounding this

[Bambiagain]

She obviously likes the ring. After two years he probably hasn't got a chance of getting it back. It certainly doesn't sound as if she'll give it back willingly. He'll have to write it down to experience.

[losgigs]

It's definitely a civil matter. Police won't get involved. Hope things sort themselves out.

[neil_loves_marie]

i don't class rings as gifts if their of the engagement / wedding type as you don't give love as a gift.
thats my point of view on it but i know every1 sees things differently.

when i purchased my wifes engagement ring it never crossed my mind as a gift but as a token of my love for when i proposed

[hc4361]

You think engagement and wedding rings are not gifts but parts of a contract?

Grief

[EDDIE51]

The ring is legally hers to keep or do what ever she likes with. No court either criminal or civil is going to tell her to give it back . I have heard of cases where the woman throws the ring away into the sea ,river or rubbish tip rather than keep it or give it back.

[hc4361]

The days when calling off an engagement was considered a breach of contract is long gone.

[sherrardk]

If ever me and himself split up, he is NOT getting, MY engagement, wedding or eternity (I do see the irony here) rings back.

[FredPuli43]

The man would have to argue that the engagement ring was given on condition that there was a marriage. That isn't going to get very far! At the time it is handed over it is intended, or hoped, that there will be a marriage but, pace Judge Judy, it is but a token of that hope or intention. There is no doubt that when the man parts with it, he intends it to be hers. As pointed out, we no longer have an action for breach of promise of marriage, which was pursued by jilted women. We can't allow it to be resurrected in favour of an intending bridegroom, by allowing him to claim back a token of his hopes when those hopes are dashed.

Otherwise, he's going to have to argue that there was some contract, for which the ring being bought by him and transferred to her was his consideration ('the price' as it were). There has to be consideration from both sides for there to be a contract; one side paying, or doing, something with the other doing nothing in return is no contract. She has given no 'consideration' in return , so there is no contract. Someone who transfers goods or money to me, voluntarily, for which I am not expected to pay or do anything for, makes me a gift. This ring is a gift.

[Mosaic]

By gum this one's rumbled on hasn't it?
A common sense approach to this would include considering the value of the ring, the length of the time mutually committed and the circumstances of the break-up.
Then you'll need to broker in a lawyer, cos if she hasn't hurled the ring at him the likelihood is she intends hanging on to it and so will need to be compelled legally somehow to return it.
So if the ring is anything less than a priceless family heirloom the sensible answer is - forget it! forget all technicalities, rights, wrongs, waivers, agreements etc because it will cost too much to put into action.
And in any case if one were to exert pressure she would simply do what all young ladies do in such a position which is hurl it off the quayside at Albert Dock so that NOBODY has it. And see if that satisfies your friend.....

[boxtops]

I kept my engagement ring when I broke off my then intended marriage thirty years ago - he said he didn't want it back, and yes, I still wear it (but not, of course, on my engagement finger).