The engagement has today not only romantic pages, but also legal consequences. Who promises the marriage, is also before the legislature as engaged. It does not matter whether the marriage proposal delivered on the beach under the palm trees or at the lunch table – and accepted – is. A special Form not required by law. Legally, the betrothal is valid at the latest with the wedding application at the Registrar’s office.

claims resolution

Binding the engagement is not: can a marriage be forced because of you, no one. A resolution is possible at any time – and it was only via SMS.

it is Precisely here that the engagement of law: this law can be put in any engagement resolution of legal claims. Unusual gifts – for example, the expensive engagement ring you can call the Partner back, if he got cold feet.

Or you can ask the Ex “an appropriate contribution”, if you bought the wedding dress, the Celebration is organized and the honeymoon has already been booked. Except such a contribution would be “unfair”. This would be the case if the husband caught the wife in bed with another – or Vice versa.

FDP-mark Walder: “engagement right

is superfluous” In practice, such cases are a rarity, however. “Claims for damages of resolved engagements are definitely into the last century,” says FDP national councillor Christa mark Walder (44), to end the engagement right. The Federal court has dealt the from Berne for the last time in 1957 with the so-called contribution obligation.

mark Walder has made the abolition amendment in the national Council’s law Commission. In the preparation of the template “marriage for all”, which intends to allow the marriage of same-sex couples, she tripped over the “outdated provisions”.

According to a poll in the Chat of the Berne Young liberals was clear: “in Order to get engaged, need the young Generation are no legal regulations. Therefore, the engagement is quite redundant today.” Any claims arising from the gifts could otherwise claim – for example, on the unjustified enrichment in the law of obligations.

CVP-Bregy: “old braid”

“The engagement right an old pigtail that belongs to cut off,” says CVP-Nationalrat Philipp Matthias Bregy (41, VS). The question of the claims was often difficult to answer. “Whether or not a Ring was given as a Present for Schätzeli or only with a view to the marriage, is difficult to prove,” says the lawyer.

Earlier in the engagement had quite a larger importance – for example, if prior to financial aid had to be done to carry it out. “Today, we can conclude for the selected events Yes, if necessary, a marriage insurance”, pushes for Bregy with a grin.

SVP-Nidegger: “No action needed”

resistance against the deletion comes mainly from the SVP. “”Marriage for all” can’t “but hot engagement for nobody”!”, the Geneva Yves Nidegger (62) defends. “An engagement degenerates to a purely symbolic act, then we can explain the marriage to the symbolic act.” An engagement is something Serious, the certain obligations, in place Nidegger.

It also disrupts the timing of the Request in the context of marriage for all. “The Engagement was previously not an issue. This shows that There is simply no need for action.”

His party colleague Andrea Geissbühler (43, BE) considers that the proposal is simply unnecessary. “The engagement interferes with the right of anyone. Instead of wasting time unnecessarily, we could devote ourselves to the real problems in this country.”

But: The national Council’s law Commission has decided with a 13 to 9 vote, a parliamentary Initiative to underline the engagement of the right and you want to make a pure romantic affair.