Ring could cost Kardashian $2 million

Kandy-Sugar

ღWhite Roséღ ♀
Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
9,096
Age
37
Location
ღAustraliaღ ღQueenslandღღGold Coastღ
Gil
0
Kris Humphries liked it and put a ring on it.

But if Kim Kardashian wants to keep her 20.5 carat engagement ring, she is going to have to pay for it.

A clause in Kardashian and her soon-to-be-ex-husband's pre-nuptial agreement allows her to buy the ring — for which Humphries reportedly paid $2 million — from him for the original purchase price if they get divorced.

After fleeing Australia last week, Kardashian reportedly met up with Humphries yesterday to thrash out some outstanding issues.

Sources told TMZ she "felt like she owed it to Kris to talk things through with him face-to-face".

After only 72 days of marriage, Kardashian filed for divorce on October 31.
Mark Streeter, principal at Streeterlaw Sydney, a law firm which specialises in divorce, told ninemsn it was unusual for an engagement ring to be included in a prenuptial agreement.

"Most prenup agreements don't anticipate the demise of the marriage so quickly," Mr Streeter said. "It seems like that clause was designed to anticipate a short relationship, which is what it turned out to be."

He said case law, at least in Australia, indicated that engagement rings became the possession of the wife once they were married.

"Obviously they went overboard with the ring and they decided to make provision in the prenup to make sure it came back," Mr Streeter said.

Mr Streeter said the clause would have been added by Humphries, not Kardashian.

"He paid for it so his interests are to protect that investment."

Source


Hmm just a tad overboard on the ring. XD

I could buy four houses with that money. >.<

If I was her I would just give back the ring. They were hardly together for very long and I don't know anyone who would want to keep an engagement ring when they were no longer with their partner. =/

I know I'd just give it back and save all the hassle.
 
Three things immediately sprung to mind after reading this:
• Who on earth would want to keep the ring considering it's only been 72 days?
• Why did they get married considering the clause made it blatantly obvious they thought it wouldn't work?
• Why spend so much on an engagement ring when I doubt they knew each other that long? Money doesn't mean quality, Ronaldo proved that when he got engaged --

article-0-0EABC1C200000578-566_233x268.jpg


This whole marriage sounds like a completely stupid idea straight from the go.
 
Back
Top