Why doesn’t engagement require a form E?

[grandideas]

Obviously, I am not a lawyer!
I was just imagining if engagement was a legal process and you had to swap something Form E like, and receive an accessible info pack on the implications of marriage and how divorce works, before you could call yourself legally engaged. (From another thread, this form/process would also highlight any previous divorces without financial orders completed). Failure to disclose assets/debts/gaping holes in pension etc would when discovered enable the spouse to have the marriage annulled or they’d be punished horribly in divorce finance or something?

Would this just reduce the marriage rate to zero and scare away all the love? Would the remaining few marriages be less likely to divorce messily, so cutting out a lot of work for family court?

Or… we create a national register of simple assets including all UK bank account balances, loans, credit, pensions, property, and once legally engaged you can view your spouse’s record. Cutting out most of the form E process for most people.

I am fully braced to be told why both these ideas are ridiculous by a lot of people far mor educated and experienced than me! Let’s hear your better ideas as well.

This is a terrible idea. Adults entering into marriage need to take responsibility for that decision and the impact.

The cost of what you describe is significant. Where do you expect this to be funded from?

It would almost certainly lead to fewer people getting arrived, but more people having children outside of marriage. Relationships would still fail because we are people and failabe, but more women would be left in more financial difficulty as they had not had the protection of a marriage contract.

A national register of assets? What kind of totalitarian system do you want to live under? And even if it existed you would have people very good at hiding their assets playing the system.
But I’m not in favour of identity cards, I am much less willing to give anyone access to so much personal information.

Interesting idea!
Hopefully end all those engagements that have a ring and a party (and presents) that never end up in a marriage too. Form E requires a wedding within 24 months or it’s invalid.
The assets aspect is interesting. Obviously better for second marriages perhaps and I agree the state shouldn’t know too much. Disclosure just between the couple then. If the one founds out the other has hidden stuff though it can be grounds for divorce.

In my country it effectively does! You decide on advance if you want to pool assets or keep them separate. The registrar comes round to talk you through it before you get married. We didn't really understand how it worked though so one the of us that brought money into the marriage will lose a lot on divorce, not that we're getting divorced. It does get reset if you have kids though.

ETA: In the UK, can you do joint tax returns if you live together before marriage? Doesn't that have the same effect? We knew all of each others finances from the tax returns.

Engagement has no legal significance. And even if it did this exercise would be a ludicrous waste of time and money for the vast majority of people getting engaged who have only modest assets.

It's also inherently unpleasant, as it implies mutual distrust. Most people who get engaged either already have a rough idea of the other's financial situation or genuinely aren't bothered.

However, for wealthy people this exercise does sometimes take place voluntarily as part of the preparation for a pre-nuptial agreement (`prenup'). In order for a prenup to have any legal force both parties have to give full and frank disclosure of their assets (and have independent legal advice) before signing it.

It the UK each individual is taxed separately- there is a little provision for moving a little income between married (& civil partnered couples) but it’s very complex and doesn’t help many people.

so because one person said to another lets get married this suddenly should change things legally?

shouldnt each grown adult be responsible for themselves in 2026?

Op was talking theoretically.
But actually why have marriage “ in law” . Two people decide to be together forever - so what? Two friends can buy a house, have kids.
If you are legally married and don’t live together (no shared assets) , you are counted as separated even if you are happily together.

A lot of people don’t seem to consider the legal implications of marriage at all, engagement is the first step before getting married and a lot of people just aren’t responsible for thinking through what this actually means.

Marriage makes it much easier to decide financial issues when they divorce, as there are clear ground rules. Marriage also provides a high degree of protection from the poorer one of the couple (nearly always the woman) and for the children. There are no such rules when people are merely cohabiting.

Am I the only person who recalls the offence of Breach of Promise ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_promise

I didn’t get engaged. We just got married.