M.M v R.A.N (A07/2022) [2023] ZALMPTHC 2 (3 March 2023)

M.M v R.A.N (A07/2022) [2023] ZALMPTHC 2 (3 March 2023)

The court found that the requirements for a valid customary marriage were satisfied. The appellant and respondent cohabited for 17 years, which raises a presumption of marriage under customary law. The appellant allowed the respondent to move into his homestead, evidencing consent. The payment and acceptance of lobola by the appellant’s family, represented by his aunt, was sufficient under Vha-Venda custom. The handing over of the bride was also established. The trial court’s application of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act was a misdirection, as the marriage predated the Act, but the factual findings were correct under common law and customary law. The appeal was dismissed, and...

Citation
[2023] ZALMPTHC 2
Parties
Appellant: M[...] M[...]; Respondent: N[...] A[...] R[...]
Court
Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 March 2023
Case Number
A07/2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Regional Court Judgment Validating Customary Marriage and Ordering Division of Joint Estate.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by employment of two counsel where applied.
Judges
AML Phatudi, MV Semenya
Legal Topics
Customary Marriage, Consent to Marriage, Lobola Payment, Recognition of Customary Marriages Act, Division of Joint Estate
Family and Children Customary Marriage Consent to Marriage Lobola Payment Recognition of Customary Marriages Act Division of Joint Estate

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M[...] M[...]

Appellant

N[...] A[...] R[...]

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Regional Court Judgment Validating Customary Marriage and Ordering Division of Joint Estate.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court was correct in finding that a valid customary marriage was concluded between the parties on 22 December 1984.
  2. 2 Whether the appellant consented to the customary marriage.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements for a valid customary marriage under common law and customary law were satisfied.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the requirements for a valid customary marriage were satisfied. The appellant and respondent cohabited for 17 years, which raises a presumption of marriage under customary law. The appellant allowed the respondent to move into his homestead, evidencing consent. The payment and acceptance of lobola by the appellant’s family, represented by his aunt, was sufficient under Vha-Venda custom. The handing over of the bride was also established. The trial court’s application of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act was a misdirection, as the marriage predated the Act, but the factual findings were correct under common law and customary law. The appeal was dismissed, and...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by employment of two counsel where applied.

Orders

  • The appellant’s appeal is dismissed with costs, including costs occasioned by employment of two counsel where applied.