[I] Evidence-burden of proof-breach of promise of marriage-burden on plaintiff to show readiness to carry out own part of contract: In an action for breach of promise to marry, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show that she has always, within reason, been prepared to carry out her part of the contract (page 125, lines 5-7). [2] Family Law-breach of promise of marriage-burden of proofburden on plaintiff to show readiness to carry out own part of contract: See [1] above. [3] Family Law-breach of promise of marriage-defences-offer to perform contract good defence if made before writ issued and refused: In an action for breach of promise to marry, an offer by the defendant to perform the contract is a good defence if it is made before the issue of the writ and refused by the plaintiff (page 124, lines 37-39). The plaintiff brought an action against the defendant for damages for breach of promise after refusing an offer of marriage by the defendant. The Supreme Court considered whether she had shown her willingness to perform her part of the contract. R.B. Marke for the plaintiff. The defendant did not appear and was not represented. KINGSLEY, J.: There has long been a school of thought which has held that breach of promise actions should be abolished, the argument being that the plaintiff has invariably escaped, to her benefit of course, what must have turned out a disastrous marriage. I am satisfied that this is the case here, so that even had I found for the plaintiff the damages, on a general score at any rate, would have been purely nominal. But I cannot see on her own story how she can possibly succeed. An offer by the defendant to perform the contract by marrying the plaintiff, if made before the issue of the writ and refused by the plaintiff, is a good defence to a breach of promise action : vide 16 Halsbury' s Laws of England, 2nd ed., at 558. I am satisfied on the evidence that this is the case here. The defendant has obviously been asking for an early marriage which the plaintiff on her own story has declined, either because the defendant's aunt told her it was quite wet in The Gambia or, alternatively, because her trinkets or other articles of apparel were not ready. Neither excuse is in my view valid. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that · 5 she has always, within reason, been prepared to carry out her share of the contract, and I am unable to find that she has discharged that burden adequately. If she has spent the small sums of money she has spoken of for the defendant's use, they must be the cause of another action. In the meantime her claim in this case today must 10 fail, and there will be judgment for the defendant. As the latter has not even bothered to notify either his own counsel or the court as to his non-attendance, there will be no order as to costs.

Suit dismissed.