Is a marriage contract valid if a man proposes to a woman who was already proposed to by his brother?

Question : He says: If a man proposes to a woman after his brother has already proposed to her and she has accepted, and then they marry the second man, is the contract valid or invalid?

Answer : The majority of scholars hold that it is valid, because the prohibition here applies to the proposal, not to the marriage contract. The forbidden act is the proposal, not the contract, so the contract is valid. Yes. They said that this is analogous to intercepting travelers, which the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited.
And he said: If he goes to the market, he has the choice. Yes, he goes and intercepts him and buys from him. Fine. And some scholars said that it is not valid; that the marriage of the second man is not valid, because the prohibition is on the proposal because it is the means to the contract. So what is the purpose of the proposal? That he marries her. It is a means, and if the means is prohibited, the goal is even more so. Therefore, the contract is not valid.
And some scholars took a middle position, meaning they said the contract is valid, but the first suitor has the right to annul it. Then those who hold this view differed on whether he has the right to annul it before and after consummation, or whether he has the right to annul it only before consummation?
Yes, all of this are the opinions of the scholars of knowledge. And our school of jurisprudence holds that the contract is valid, and that the first suitor does not have the right to annul it, neither before nor after consummation. However, the second man, in any case, is to be disciplined and punished at the request of the first man.