Amod (born Peer) v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund (444/98) [1999] ZASCA 76; [1999] 4 All SA 421 (A) (29 September 1999)

Amod (born Peer) v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund (444/98) [1999] ZASCA 76; [1999] 4 All SA 421 (A) (29 September 1999)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the dependants' action in Roman Dutch law is a flexible remedy, intended to provide relief to dependants whom the deceased had a legally enforceable duty to support. The appellant, married to the deceased under Islamic law in a de facto monogamous union, had such a duty of support, which was legally enforceable and worthy of protection by law. The court rejected the argument that only civil marriages qualify for the dependants' action, finding that contemporary values of tolerance, pluralism, and equality require recognition of duties of support arising from solemn, monogamous marriages under recognized faiths such as Islam. The court distinguished...

Citation
[1999] ZASCA 76
Parties
Appellant: Hafiza Ismail Amod (born Peer); Respondent: Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund; Amicus Curiae: Commission for Gender Equality
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 September 1999
Case Number
444/98
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is substituted with an order in favour of the appellant.
Judges
Mahomed, Olivier, Zulman, Farlam, Madlanga
Legal Topics
Dependants Action, Loss of Support, Islamic Marriage, Boni Mores, Legal Duty of Support
Delict Civil Procedure Dependants Action Loss of Support Islamic Marriage Boni Mores Legal Duty of Support

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hafiza Ismail Amod (born Peer)

Appellant

Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund

Respondent

Commission for Gender Equality

Amicus Curiae

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a widow married under Islamic law in a de facto monogamous marriage is entitled to claim loss of support under the dependants' action.
  2. 2 Whether the duty of support arising from such a marriage is worthy of legal protection for the purposes of the dependants' action.
  3. 3 Whether the common law should be developed to accommodate claims by widows in Islamic marriages.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the dependants' action in Roman Dutch law is a flexible remedy, intended to provide relief to dependants whom the deceased had a legally enforceable duty to support. The appellant, married to the deceased under Islamic law in a de facto monogamous union, had such a duty of support, which was legally enforceable and worthy of protection by law. The court rejected the argument that only civil marriages qualify for the dependants' action, finding that contemporary values of tolerance, pluralism, and equality require recognition of duties of support arising from solemn, monogamous marriages under recognized faiths such as Islam. The court distinguished...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is substituted with an order in favour of the appellant.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay to the plaintiff the sum of R 250 000 as damages for the loss of support suffered by her in consequence of the death of her husband Umar Sheik Amod in a motor car accident on 25 July 1993.
  • The defendant is to pay the costs of the action.