There was a divorce case in Hong Kong few days ago. The Court of Appeal decided the case applying an UK case named White v White. This case is a landmark case in the redistribution of wealth on divorce. The House of Lords had abandoned the 'reasonable requirements' rule in this case. The Court of Appeal applied the rules in the White case and accepted the 'equal distribution' approach in the matter of redistribution of wealth on divorce. In response to this case, some journalists suggested that couples may sign prenuptial agreements to protect their respective rights should they divorce.

Signing prenuptial agreement is a popular practice in Western countries especially for the millionaires. Prenuptial agreement usually includes provisions concerning distribution of wealth should the couple divorce. One point to note is that prenuptial agreement is not recognized by the law in Hong Kong.

I am not prepared to discuss the legal impact of this case. And I do not believe anyone would be interested in reading a 'law review' written by me. I am not too concerned with the legal impact of this case. What interests me is how prenuptial agreement changed the meaning of marriage.

'I xxx am willing to marry you xxx as my wife/husband and swear that I will love and respect you forever and ever no matter good or bad environment, healthy or sick, rich or poor. May God accept my oath.', I guess everyone would be familiar with the wedding oath. I guess no one would say this or 'I do' if he/she is not in love with his/her partner. And no one would expect to divorce at the time of marriage. This is how I see what marriage is. Two persons are in love with each other and willing to form a family and to love and respect each other 'forever and ever'.

By suggesting people to sign prenuptial agreements to protect their rights, I think that the meaning of marriage is no longer the same. I personally think that prenuptial agreement is contrary to the meaning of marriage. The signing of prenuptial agreement presupposes the possibility of divorce which is in contrast to the meaning of marriage. I guess no couple would expect their marriage ending up to be a failure. I believe that all couples would have the same belief as the wedding oath. Therefore I think that prenuptial agreement is contrary to the meaning of marriage.

The world is changing and our values are changing accordingly. I understand that there are many uncertainties in life, and no one could guarantee to love someone 'forever and ever'. Marriage may not be understood the same as before. But are people not supposed to '執子之手, 與子偕老'? I do not know the answer, but I know that the idea of signing prenuptial agreement sickens me.