Australia Court Cancels Marriage As Bride Claims She Thought It Was A Prank

A Melbourne couple's marriage has been annulled by the court after the bride revealed she thought their wedding was a social media prank and not a legitimate legal ceremony. In a ruling issued in October 2024, the family court concluded that the bride, who cannot be named for legal reasons, believed the wedding was simply a social media event designed to enhance the groom's Instagram presence.

The couple, who met on a dating app in September 2023, were in contact for three months before the groom invited the bride to a "white party" in Sydney. Upon arrival at the venue, the bride was taken aback to discover that the event was actually a wedding organised by the groom. The bride testified in court that when she asked about the event, the groom said that it was a "prank wedding".

According to a report in The Guardian, the bride told the court, "When I got there, and I didn't see anybody in white, I asked him, 'What's happening?' 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."

Footage of the ceremony was shown in court, where the couple could be seen exchanging vows and rings. Despite her seemingly enthusiastic participation, the bride claimed she was only acting, saying, "We had to act to make it look real."

She said it wasn't until he asked her to include his name on her application for permanent residency that she realised the wedding was legal. The groom allegedly told her that he was not a permanent resident and that he had arranged the marriage to assist him in securing residency. She said that she had been deceived from the outset.

The bride made it clear that she would never marry without her parent's consent, a bridal gown or a reception party - none of which were present at the ceremony.

The groom, who has 17,000 Instagram followers, denied being a social media influencer and contested the bride's version of events. He claimed that he had informed her of his bisexuality shortly after they met and that she was "cool with it" and moved in with him.

In court, the groom maintained that the wedding was meant to be an "intimate" ceremony ahead of an "official" wedding in their home country at a later date. He claimed both parties had agreed to these circumstances. However, the judge dismissed this claim as "near meaningless," stating that it lacked sufficient detail.

The judge also noted discrepancies in the groom's testimony regarding the couple's living arrangements, finding that they had kept separate residences. The judge expressed disbelief that the bride would agree to marry so quickly after accepting the proposal, especially without family or friends present at the ceremony.

The court ruled that the marriage was invalid, annulling the union.