kimbraa:
And what a "classy" man as used in this context would do if she does give him the ring is that she keeps it.

This is the most awkward sentence I have read all day. Are you drowning?

Shugavee:
cause its a gift, u don't tell people to return gifts.. but they return it anyways to forget the memory .... but some people dont care n end it deep down of them immediately

It is not a gift.

It is a marker/symbol of an intention.

I don't know any gift only one kind of person can buy you and that is dependent on a question.

vivypretty:
Sometimes it remains with the lady, since it was bought specifically for her except if it is one that is generational.
But it all depends on the persons involved.

It was symbolic license to own the dick so since the dick ain't hers again why keep the license?

hajoke2000:
engagement ring should be for the future lover

Is that ur final answer.

I guess u are wearing tinted glass when u read the question

Depends. Sometimes engagement rings can be gifts, in this situation the woman keeps it. If the man is the one to break the engagement off for no just reason or he suddenly wants to ditch her for another woman, she can also keep it. If she's the one to break the engagement off, then she has to return it. So depends on the situation.....

Sagamite:
When an engagement is cancelled and the couple previously intending to marry decide to go their separate ways, what do you think should happen to the engagement ring?

It’s not what we think should happen
It’s what happens from a legal perspective
The woman returns the ring regardless of who caused the break up. It’s viewed as a conditional gift.

aflyingbird:
Depends. Sometimes engagement rings can be gifts, in this situation the woman keeps it. If the man is the one to break the engagement off for no just reason or he suddenly wants to ditch her for another woman, she can also keep it. If she's the one to break the engagement off, then she has to return it. So depends on the situation.....

It’s returned to the giver if it’s taken to court

MissRaine69:

It’s returned to the giver if it’s taken to court

No, not always.

aflyingbird:


No, not always.

What people choose to do and what’s legal is two different things.
If i was a man and I gave you ring and it did not work out and I asked for it back and you refused I will take you to court and the ring will be returned. It’s a conditional gift in the eyes of the law.
We are not arguing grey areas here it’s what should happen not the Nigerian hijacked version of things.

MissRaine69:

What people choose to do and what’s legal is two different things.
If i was a man and I gave you ring and it did not work out and I asked for it back and you refused I will take you to court and the ring will be returned. It’s a conditional gift in the eyes of the law.
We are not arguing grey areas here it’s what should happen not the Nigerian hijacked version of things.

If you take me to court, I might win if I can prove it wasn't a conditional gift. The "conditional" bit depends on many things. I'm outside Nigeria and speaking from the perspective of how things work around here.

What exactly would a lady use an engagement ring for if she isnt engaged to the man who got her the ring?

Cheap ring? I'll return it,
Expensive ring? I'll disposed it

They we removed it

MissRaine69:

It’s not what we think should happen
It’s what happens from a legal perspective
The woman returns the ring regardless of who caused the break up. It’s viewed as a conditional gift.

No, darling.

It depends on the country. That is what I found out that made me create the thread and some yeye 2buffagain and Gerrard59 thought I had gone mad.

In England law, it is regarded as an ABSOLUTE GIFT. Which means the man cannot get it back except the man can prove otherwise. So the burden of proof is on him.

Typical UK!

A man-hating country. The way it creates laws is:

- If the issue is likely mainly affect a man, then it is okay.

- Let women have rights, men have responsibilities.

UK for you!

I don't know how something that was bought for a specific aim that is then cancelled can be regarded as an absolute gift. But trust feminists, they will never complain about such but you see them all over UK TV whining about some nonsense claiming women are victims.

aflyingbird:
Depends. Sometimes engagement rings can be gifts, in this situation the woman keeps it. If the man is the one to break the engagement off for no just reason or he suddenly wants to ditch her for another woman, she can also keep it. If she's the one to break the engagement off, then she has to return it. So depends on the situation.....

So basically, your logic is:

- If a man breaks off the engagement, he should get punished.

- If a woman breaks off the engagement, she should not get the benefit to punish him?

That is logical to you?

Your logical compass is very similar to that of MrBrownJay1

Sagamite:


No, darling.

It depends on the country. That is what I found out that made me create the thread and some yeye 2buffagain and Gerrard58 thought I had gone mad.

In England law, it is regarded as an ABSOLUTE GIFT. Which means the man cannot get it back except the man can prove otherwise. So the burden of proof is on him.

Typical UK!

A man-hating country. The way it creates laws is:

- If the issue is likely mainly affect a man, then it is okay.

- Let women have rights, men have responsibilities.

UK for you!

I don't know how something that was bought for a specific aim that is then cancelled can be regarded as an absolute gift. But trust feminists, they will never complain about such but you see them all over UK TV whining about some nonsense claiming women are victims.

The law didn't evolve to protect women, stop being paranoid.

It's to protect the coffers of the tax man. Because there are tax implications when "gifts" are involved.

aflyingbird:


If you take me to court, I might win if I can prove it wasn't a conditional gift. The "conditional" bit depends on many things. I'm outside Nigeria and speaking from the perspective of how things work around here.

An engement ring is conditional and no it does not depend on “ many things” it relates to marirage and as the daughter of a lawyer ( who makes a living out of this sort of thing here and abroad) this one I am quiet confident about regardless of location
Why do you think Mariah Carey settled out of court?

Sagamite:


No, darling.

It depends on the country. That is what I found out that made me create the thread and some yeye 2buffagain and Gerrard59 thought I had gone mad.

In England law, it is regarded as an ABSOLUTE GIFT. Which means the man cannot get it back except the man can prove otherwise. So the burden of proof is on him.

Typical UK!

A man-hating country. The way it creates laws is:

- If the issue is likely mainly affect a man, then it is okay.

- Let women have rights, men have responsibilities.

UK for you!

I don't know how something that was bought for a specific aim that is then cancelled can be regarded as an absolute gift. But trust feminists, they will never complain about such but you see them all over UK TV whining about some nonsense claiming women are victims.

That’s easy
If I was a man
I will sue for breach of contract
And I will get it back

MissRaine69:

What people choose to do and what’s legal is two different things.
If i was a man and I gave you ring and it did not work out and I asked for it back and you refused I will take you to court and the ring will be returned. It’s a conditional gift in the eyes of the law.
We are not arguing grey areas here it’s what should happen not the Nigerian hijacked version of things.

I am afraid she is right.

Only Ireland, out of all Anglo-Saxon developed countries I checked, had sane laws and regard it as a conditional gift.

US and Canada is dependent on the state/region. Most follow her flawed logic of:

- If a man breaks off the engagement, he should get punished. Men have responsibilities.

- If a woman breaks off the engagement, she should not get the benefit to punish him? Women have rights.

UK and Australia, just blatantly sexist! Only if a man can prove it is a family heirloom would it be returned, otherwise it is hers.

shaybebaby:

The law didn't evolve to protect women, stop being paranoid.

It's to protect the coffers of the tax man. Because there are tax implications when "gifts" are involved.

Sorry, darling, there is no tax implications for engagement rings. EVEN if it is seen as absolute gifts.

The laws in the UK are created to favour women.

If a law is likely to, on most occassions, disadvantage women, it would be changed.

If a law is likely to, on most occassions, disadvantage men, nothing would happen even though everyone knows it is wrong.

That is UK for you.

I remember when I told you feminist peeps I was a social observer and could write you volumes; I wasn't kidding, girl.

https://www.nairaland.com/4316979/marriage-finally-over/16#64721687

Sagamite:


I am afraid she is right.

Only Ireland, out of all Anglo-Saxon developed countries I checked, had sane laws and regard it as a conditional gift.

US and Canada is dependent on the state/region. Most follow her flawed logic of:

- If a man breaks off the engagement, he should get punished. Men have responsibilities.

- If a woman breaks off the engagement, she should not get the benefit to punish him? Women have rights.

UK and Australia, just blatantly sexist! Only if a man can prove it is a family heirloom would it be returned, otherwise it is hers.

Two countries out of how many? If I was a man I would make sure I get engaged anywhere but those two!
That said
Why would I want to keep it? Punished for what? What’s preferable a broken engagement or a marriage?
The ring will be returned regardless of whose at fault in my case there are things I will fight tooth and nail for but not for this type of memory.

MissRaine69:

An engement ring is conditional and no it does not depend on “ many things” it relates to marirage and as the daughter of a lawyer ( who makes a living out of this sort of thing here and abroad) this one I am quiet confident about regardless of location
Why do you think Mariah Carey settled out of court?

Daughter of a Lawyer ko. If you were, YOU SHOULD KNOW that an engagement ring can be a gift if given on special days like birthdays, Val's day, Christmas and other holidays. If you were, YOU SHOULD KNOW there are times when people give engagement rings as a form of gift-exchange too. In situations like these an engagement ring is considered a gift and the woman keeps it.

Daughter of a Lawyer ko. With your poor replies and the rate at which you keep posting fake pictures on your profile claiming them as yours, I hear you.

MissRaine69:

That’s easy
If I was a man
I will sue for breach of contract
And I will get it back

In the UK?

You would waste your money and lose.

They don't give a shyt about your rights if you are male. Especially white, straight male. It is a loony liberal country that thinks it is okay to discriminate against them. I fully understand these guys anger.

They would know it is wrong and injustice, yet, NOTHING would change because the chief advocates (the press) are all run by liberals. That is why, despite me thinking FOX News are lunatics, Americans should be grateful they have it.

I heard Canada is like the UK too, where liberals control everything and want to force their lunacy on society.

Here is a sample for you.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40294530

Canadian judge rules woman can keep $14,300 engagement ring

A Canadian judge has ruled that a woman can keep her C$19,000 ($14,300, £11,210) engagement ring.

Lauren Arbuckle's ex-fiance sued her after their relationship ended because of squabbles over wedding finances.

Devin Sherrington sued for the return of the ring and a $6,000 loan after the three-year relationship fell apart.

A Nova Scotia court found that although she ended the relationship, it was not her idea to break up so she did not have to return the gift.

Small claims adjudicator Gregg Knudsen said that since the 3.25 carat diamond ring was gifted on the condition the two would marry, the entire matter rested on who ended the engagement.

If Ms Arbuckle, a hairstylist and make-up artist, ended it, then she must relinquish the gift, he said. However, if Mr Sherrington, a personal trainer, broke it off, then the gift was rightfully hers.

The couple had been engaged for one year before deciding to call it quits because the two could not agree about how to pay for the wedding.

Ms Arbuckle wanted a lavish affair, while Mr Sherrington wanted something more cost-conscious.

He didn't believe his fiancee could afford her half of the wedding cost, the court heard, and feared he would get stuck paying for the whole bill.

He suggested postponing the wedding but she did not want to. Finally, she decided to end the relationship.

At first, Mr Sherrington told Ms Arbuckle she could keep the ring, text messages show. But later, he asked for it back, as well as money he says he loaned her for a trip to Mexico.

Ultimately, Mr Knudsen found that it was Mr Sherrington who called off the engagement, and so the ring rightfully belongs to Ms Arbuckle - although he also ruled that she had to pay him back about C$3,000 for the Mexico trip.

"I find the postponement was an indefinite postponement, sufficient to treat the engagement as over. Ms. Arbuckle may have ended the relationship but Mr. Sherrington ended the engagement," he said.

But Ms Arbuckle's victory is short-lived, as she has had to file for bankruptcy and all her assets - including the ring - are being held by a trustee.

The warped logic of the judge was that "she ended the relationship but he was the one that ended the engagement".



I don't know how someone can remain engaged to someone they are no more in a relationship with.

That is the sexist and misandrist madness one sees in countries like the UK nowadays. The feminist keep on pushing "victim" while advocating all rights but no resposibilities for women.

Sagamite:


In the UK?

You would waste your money and lose.

They don't give a shyt about your rights if you are male. Especially white, straight male. It is a loony liberal country that thinks it is okay to discriminate against them. I fully understand these guys anger.

They would know it is wrong and injustice, yet, NOTHING would change because the chief advocates (the press) are all run by liberals. That is why, despite me thinking FOX News are lunatics, Americans should be greatful they have it.

I heard Canada is like the UK too, where liberals control everything and want to force their lunacy on society.

Here is a sample for you.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40294530

And there are instances when a man won ...
That’s a reference point

aflyingbird:


An engagement ring can be a gift if given on special days like birthdays, Val's day, Christmas and other holidays. There r times when people give engagement rings as a form of gift-exchange too. In situations like these an engagement ring is considered a gift and the woman keeps it.

Daughter of a Lawyer ko. With the rate at which you keep posting fake pictures on your profile claiming them as yours, I hear u.

Thank you

MissRaine69:


And there are instances when a man won ...
That’s a reference point

Only in US and Canada. And it depends on the state.

In the UK and Australia, hell no.

Sagamite:


Only in US and Canada. And it depends on the state.

In the UK and Australia, hell no.

This is why choosing wisely is essential

aflyingbird:


Daughter of a Lawyer ko. If you were, YOU SHOULD KNOW that an engagement ring can be a gift if given on special days like birthdays, Val's day, Christmas and other holidays. If you were, YOU SHOULD KNOW there are times when people give engagement rings as a form of gift-exchange too. In situations like these an engagement ring is considered a gift and the woman keeps it.

Daughter of a Lawyer ko. With your poor replies and the rate at which you keep posting fake pictures on your profile claiming them as yours, I hear you.

Hell fcking NO!

It is a traditional symbolic gestures intended for only ONE purpose.

MissRaine69:

This is why choosing wisely is essential

Choosing what wisely?

omo na to auction the ring ooo if na expensive ring but if na 2k 3k ring dem fit vex throw am 4 wateromo na to auction the ring ooo if na expensive ring but if na 2k 3k ring dem fit vex throw am 4 wateromo na to auction the ring ooo if na expensive ring but if na 2k 3k ring dem fit vex throw am 4 water

MissRaine69:

Two countries out of how many? If I was a man I would make sure I get engaged anywhere but those two!
That said
Why would I want to keep it? Punished for what? What’s preferable a broken engagement or a marriage?
The ring will be returned regardless of whose at fault in my case there are things I will fight tooth and nail for but not for this type of memory.

The place you proposed/got engaged would be irrelevant in a UK court.

As for why would you want to keep it; the culture that is dictact for the mumus that engage in it is that "if you really love and value the girl and want to show this", then it is customary you spend anywhere between 1 to 3 months salary on the engagement ring.

That is enough incentive for anyone with a brain not to flush down the toilet.