Is a marriage contract valid if the bride's guardian said to the groom's agent: "I have married my ward and daughter to you for a dowry of such and such," instead of "I have married your client"? And if it is not valid, does the daughter then become a wife to the father, and thus forbidden to his son?

If the guardian says to the father: "I marry you," and does not say: "to your client," or "to your son," or "to so-and-so son of so-and-so," while intending to marry the woman to the son, and the father intends to accept the marriage for his son, and the witnesses are aware of this; then there is a scholarly dispute regarding the validity of this contract: some invalidate it, some validate it for the agent but not for the principal, and some validate it for the principal religiously. The preponderant view is the religious validity of the contract for the son, as long as everyone knows that he is the intended party. However, the more cautious approach is to renew the contract with an explicit formula indicating the agency and specifying the spouses.