Ownership dispute over 18ct diamond ring could be decided at County Court trial

A warring couple’s fight over who gets to keep a diamond engagement ring has landed in court with the former lovers both claiming ownership of the 18ct dazzler.

Constantinos Hatzis and Anastasia Soulios called off their engagement and are now locked in a bitter court battle over who gets to keep more than $100,000 worth of jewellery. Picture: SUPPLIED

Not all is fair in love and war.

A warring couple’s fight over who gets to keep a diamond engagement ring has landed in court with the former lovers both claiming ownership of the 18ct dazzler.

Wheelers Hill man Con Hatzis is suing his ex-fiance Anastasia Soulios in the hope that the courts make her return more than $100,000 worth of jewellery he had gifted her during their relationship.

According to a writ filed to the Victorian County Court on Valentine’s Day Mr Hatzis has demanded Ms Soulios return an 18ct white gold diamond ring, a pair of diamond earrings and a diamond tennis bracelet that were part of engagement gifts.

Mr Hatzis claims that he gave Ms Soulios the gifts on the “implied condition that (she) would keep them safely and return them to Hatzis on demand in the event they did not marry”.

Court documents reveal the couple split in August 2022, having never made it to the altar.

According to her court documents, Ms Soulios claims this was due in part to her fiance’s infidelity.

The 18ct white gold diamond ring Con Hatzis is demanding be returned. Picture: Supplied

Ms Soulios also claims she was “under no obligation” to return any of the jewellery and that the bracelet and earrings were 2021 Christmas presents from Mr Hatzis rather than engagement gifts.

“She admits that the engagement ring was given in contemplation of marriage but otherwise denies (that it must be returned),” court documents say.

Mr Hatzis claims he has suffered a loss of $101,035 and the ability to re-sell the jewellery to “mitigate its loss as a result of (Ms) Soulios’ unjust detention” of the goods.

According to the writ, Mr Hatzis submitted that he proposed in March 2022 before the relationship broke down a month later.

But in her statement Ms Soulios said while the relationship did end in April 2022, it resumed again in May before coming to a complete end in August 2022.

Ms Soulios also fought fire with fire, demanding Mr Hatzis return a $9500 TAG watch.

Mr Hatzis demanded that the jewellery be returned in May 2023 in a letter, with Ms Soulios declining a few months later.

Mr Hatzis also alleged that Ms Soulios broke the ring in April 2022.

While she admitted to breaking the ring, Ms Soulios said the claim was “irrelevant” as she “repaired (the ring) in or around May 2022.”

Ms Soulios has also sought to fight fire with fire, demanding that he return a $9500 TAG watch she had bought him as an engagement gift.

“(She) seeks the return of the (TAG watch) or alternatively to have the market value of the engagement gift set off the market value of the engagement ring.”

The dispute will be decided at trial unless the parties agree to a settlement.

Mediation has been scheduled for the end of May.