Arizona Tribune - 'I don't': AI wedding vows fall foul of Dutch law

The couple thought they had sealed their love at the April 2025 service in Zwolle, in the north of the country.

Seeking an informal civil ceremony, they had asked a friend to officiate -- so the friend turned to ChatGPT to help compose the vows.

Between them, however, they missed the point, a Zwolle court ruled on Tuesday.

Couples are required by law to declare that they will fulfil all the legal obligations linked to marriage, the court noted in its judgment.

"The aforementioned statement shows that the man and the woman did not make the declaration referred to in Article 1:67, paragraph 1, of the Dutch Civil Code," it ruled.

The ruling quoted the AI-generated vows to make its point.

"Do you promise to stand by (women's name) today, tomorrow, and forever?" the man was asked during the ceremony.

"To laugh together, grow together, and love each other no matter what?"

- 'A crazy couple' -

They were also asked if they would "keep supporting each other, teasing each other, holding on to each other -- even in difficult times?"

Once those questions were answered, they were declared "not only husband and wife, but above all a team, a crazy couple, each other's love and each other's home!"

None of this found favour with the court, however.

Because of the text used at the ceremony, it ruled, the marriage between the man and the woman was not formalised.

"This means that the marriage certificate was erroneously recorded in the civil registry," it added.

The couple argued that they had not intended to make this mistake and that the civil officer at the ceremony had not pointed it out at the time.

Changing the date of their marriage would hit them hard emotionally, they argued, asking to be allowed to keep the date of their initial wedding as that of their legal marriage.

But there was no happily ever after from the court.

"The court understands how important the marriage date listed on the certificate is to the man and the woman, but it cannot ignore the law," it ruled.

R.Garcia--AT