Engagement: what the law makes of it

Engagement has no definition in the Civil Code. It creates neither a status nor an obligation to marry, and no formality brings it into being. The law treats it as a fact, which can be proved by any means: an announcement, a party, witness statements, correspondence.

This silence is not an oversight. It follows from the freedom to marry, which judges consistently protect: a promise of marriage cannot be enforced, and a clause providing for a sum to be paid if the engagement is broken off is regarded as void.

Either of the engaged couple may break it off at any time, without having to give reasons. The mere fact of breaking off gives no right to compensation, since no one can be blamed for exercising a freedom that the law precisely guarantees them.

The circumstances of the break-up may, on the other hand, give rise to liability on the part of the person responsible, on the basis of the ordinary law of civil liability, now Article 1240 of the Civil Code. Judges have, for example, held liable a brutal break-up on the eve of the ceremony, or a break-up without reason after a long engagement.

Compensation may cover material loss, such as expenses incurred for the wedding, a rented home or a job given up with a view to living together. It may also cover non-material harm, which the trial judges assess at their sole discretion according to the circumstances.

It is for the person seeking compensation to establish the fault, the harm and the link between the two. The decisions are numerous and closely tied to the facts of each case, which makes any generalisation hazardous.

Article 1088 of the Civil Code provides that any gift made in consideration of marriage lapses if the marriage does not take place. Property given with the planned union in mind, by the engaged couple or by their families, must then in principle be returned.

The ring follows a logic of its own. The courts often regard it as a customary present, which remains the property of the person who received it when its value is proportionate to the means of the person who gave it. It is otherwise with a family heirloom, which must be returned.

The death of a fiancé or fiancée does not erase all legal consequences. The courts have accepted that the surviving partner may obtain compensation for their loss from the person responsible for the death, provided they establish the reality and seriousness of the shared plan.

Article 171 of the Civil Code also allows the President of the Republic to authorise, for serious reasons, the celebration of a marriage after the death of one of the future spouses, when official formalities unequivocally mark their consent. Such a marriage confers no right to inherit from the deceased.