The plaintiff alleged that a religious divorce certificate and related registry entry were fraudulently altered after execution to insert a waiver of her contractual entitlement to a marriage gift contained in a marriage contract.
She sought declarations invalidating the waiver and damages exceeding $2 million.
After an eight‑day trial, the court rejected the allegation of fraud, finding on a balance of probabilities that the waiver of the marriage gift was present in the documents when signed and that the plaintiff’s subsequent conduct was inconsistent with her claim of later alteration.
The court also held that, even if fraud had been proven, the action would have been barred by applicable limitation periods under the Limitations Act, 2002.
The action was dismissed.
