The many Aspects of Engagement Rings – From Love to Ownership Issues

Engagement rings are generally considered to be the culmination of an agreement and acceptance of a proposal for marriage whereby a man gifts his prospective bride with one such ring. It goes back to the ancient times and sociologists say that the Roman custom of wives wearing rings with keys attached indicated the husband’s ownership over her.

In modern times too, there has been an ongoing debate, not of ownership of a human being per se but of the gifted ring. Traditionally, it is considered that if a wedding is called off due to the man doing so, the woman is not obliged to return the ring. She can keep it as compensation for her damaged reputation.

However, a fault rule applies in cases where a betrothal fails and the liability for it has to be fixed. The possession of the ring depends largely on it. As in the traditional approach, the fiancé is entitled to get the ring back unless it is his actions that caused the breakup of the relationship. In another no-fault scenario, men cannot be deprived of the return of engagement rings and women can claim right to property of the rings only when the marriage occurs.

Engagement rings in most states of the USA are legally considered to be "conditional gifts". This is contrary to the general line of thinking that gifts cannot be asked to be given back once presented. In a case in Michigan in 2001, judges ruled that engagement rings are gifted because of an engagement and a promise of marriage and hence should be treated as a strictly "conditional gift". Hence once the engagement is broken, the ring should be returned back to the donor and the question of who broke the engagement or why is absolutely irrelevant and redundant. In other states, it is not possible to go to court over the issue of return of an engagement ring as no civil action can be taken for a breach of promise to marry. Hence the question of return does not arise at all.

However, if an engagement ring is to be treated as an unconditional gift of love the woman gets to keep it regardless of whether the engagement progresses to marriage or not. This has been highlighted in recent court rulings in the United States when the date of the gift was taken into account. For example, Christmas and Valentine’s Day are widely accepted to be days when gifts are exchanged. If an engagement ring has been given as a gift for Christmas, the woman gets to keep it even if the relationship does not move forward to marriage and remains as her personal property.

There is a particularly interesting case that was decided in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Australia. A man had informed his fiancée that she could keep the marriage ring he had gifted, even if the marriage plans did not materialise. However, when she threw the ring away after the engagement was terminated, he filed a case against her. The Courts held that even though the man had said she could keep it, the ring remained a conditional gift. Hence, she could not throw it away and was therefore ordered to pay the price of the ring to the man.

In England and Wales, an engagement ring is considered to be an absolute gift to the fiancée. This presumption of course can be overruled if it can be established that the gift was fully conditional and it was agreed by both parties that the ring would be returned if the marriage was called off for any reason.

This is another side of engagement rings far removed from love and romance where ownership of the rings finds precedence over everything else.

however, if you have been looking to buy an engagement ring for your would be, then paying a visit to Adc will certainly help you a lot in finding that perfect ring.

Engagement rings are the ultimate expression of love, which is why Australian Diamond Company designs them to perfection.