Whale Large Capital
  • Politics
  • World News
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Politics
  • World News
  • Business
  • Investing

Whale Large Capital

World News

Court annuls marriage because bride thought it was just an Instagram stunt

by January 10, 2025
January 10, 2025
Court annuls marriage because bride thought it was just an Instagram stunt

An Australian judge has annulled the marriage of a Melbourne couple after the bride told the court that she took part in the wedding ceremony believing it was a social media “prank.”

According to documents published by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, the woman in her 20s met the man in his 30s on a dating platform in September 2023. They met in person the following day and started dating.

They cannot be named as the identities of those involved in family law proceedings in Australia are protected.

The woman told the family court that they started planning a trip to Sydney in October that year, as the man said he wanted to take her there in December.

She said the man proposed to her in late December and she accepted. Two days later they got married in a ceremony in Sydney – but the woman believed the wedding was “all an act.”

The woman said the groom had told her to attend a venue wearing a white dress because there would be a “white party” – a party at which all the guests wear white – and, since the trip had been pre-planned and they had previously attended a white party in Queensland, she “never suspected, like, anything fishy.”

She emphasized that the dress she wore was not a wedding dress, according to court documents.

When she arrived at the venue, she said, she did not see anybody else in white.

When she asked the man what was happening, he “pulled me aside, and he told me that he’s organising a prank wedding for his social media, to be precise, Instagram, because he wants to boost his content, and wants to start monetising his Instagram page,” the court heard.

She said the groom was a social media influencer – a claim that he denied, but he did admit to having more than 17,000 Instagram followers.

The woman said she thought marriages were only legal if they took place in a court, and that she called a friend to ask for advice on what was happening.

Her friend told her that she could not get legally married without filing a notice of intention to marry, according to the court documents. Reassured, the woman went ahead with the ceremony.

She told the court that she was happy “playing along” because the groom told her he could have used anyone for the video but that he wanted to use her so she would not feel jealous.

According to court documents, none of the bride’s family or friends were in attendance – the only people present were a photographer and a friend of the photographer.

The woman told the court that she was “furious” when she found out in February 2024 that the marriage was real and that it happened because the man was seeking asylum.

She said she had a streamlined process of applying for permanent residency as a health professional and, when she was about to apply, he asked her to put him as a dependent – something she believed was not possible, because she thought they were not married.

The man disputed in court that the marriage was not a regular one, and said they had lived together before becoming engaged. The woman denied this, according to court documents.

The groom told the court that he had started making plans for the wedding in November.

A notice of intended marriage dated November 20, 2023 – a month before the man had proposed – had two signatures on it. However, the bride denied seeing it or signing it, according to court documents.

In his ruling, Justice Joshua Wilson said that “it beggars belief that a couple would become engaged in late December then married two days later.” While the judge acknowledged that impulsive marriages can take place, he pointed to the fact that “a wedding celebrant had been retained over a month before” the man had proposed to the woman.

Since the man had told the court that he knew the woman was religious, the judge also commented: “Precisely why she would participate in a civil marriage and not in a church marriage ceremony went unexplored. It made no sense to me that she would.”

He concluded that the woman took part in the wedding ceremony believing it was a stunt for social media and ruled that it was not a legally valid marriage.

This post appeared first on cnn.com
0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Genocide is declared once more in Sudan. How did the country get here?
next post
Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro sworn in for third presidential term

You may also like

‘This isn’t Russia, never was, and never will...

April 13, 2025

Would Pope Francis resign? Experts say it’s unlikely...

March 1, 2025

Vance uses half-truths to lecture a European audience...

February 14, 2025

Georgian government votes in far-right former soccer player...

December 14, 2024

2,000-year-old Greek statue found abandoned in garbage bag

January 22, 2025

Ukraine port city ‘on fire’ after ‘massive’ Russian...

March 21, 2025

Sobbing and prayers echo through South Korean airport...

December 30, 2024

Gaza hostage families urge Trump and Harris to...

September 9, 2024

Russia jails French researcher Vinatier for three years in ‘foreign...

October 14, 2024

Criminals are looting millions from ATMs in Europe....

October 27, 2024

    Subscribe today to receive exclusive access to all our retirement secrets and income strategies, including special financial news and updates from our experts. From time to time, our newsletters feature valuable insights and analysis on the latest financial trends. Don't miss out on these exclusive updates – join our subscription to stay informed!


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.



    Latest

    • South Koreans cast votes for new president to succeed Yoon after his ouster over martial law declaration

      June 3, 2025
    • Puerto Rico permits nonbinary gender marker on birth certificates in landmark court decision

      June 3, 2025
    • Dutch government collapses as Wilders’ far-right party leaves coalition

      June 3, 2025
    • Dozens of Palestinians killed near Gaza aid distribution point, health officials say, in third day of shooting

      June 3, 2025
    • Peru’s plan to drastically reduce Nazca Lines park size sparks concerns over environmental and heritage risks

      June 3, 2025
    • Trump’s fresh White House portrait sparks interest amid controversy over National Portrait Gallery leadership

      June 3, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (649)
    • Investing (661)
    • Politics (4,320)
    • World News (2,916)
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Contact us
    • About us

    Disclaimer: WhaleLargeCapital.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2024 WhaleLargeCapital.com | All Rights Reserved