Rasello v Chali and Others, Chali and Others v Rasello and Others (A69/2012, 683/2011) [2013] ZAFSHC 182 (24 October 2013)

Rasello v Chali and Others, Chali and Others v Rasello and Others (A69/2012, 683/2011) [2013] ZAFSHC 182 (24 October 2013)

The court held that the appellant failed to prove the existence of a valid customary marriage with the deceased. The absence of delivery of the bride, an essential requirement under Sesotho custom, was not refuted by the appellant. The ceremony referenced by the appellant occurred before the alleged payment of lobola and did not involve her family, thus failing to meet customary requirements. The court found that mere cohabitation and payment of lobola, without the formal handing over of the bride, did not establish a valid customary marriage. The appellant’s application to admit further evidence (the divorce decree) was dismissed as it would not affect the outcome, given the failure to...

Citation
[2013] ZAFSHC 182
Parties
Appellant: Masefako Lydia Rasello; Respondent: Matetenki Maria Chali; Respondent: Leepo Maria Chali; Respondent: Thabiso Charles Chali; Respondent: Tisetso Julia Chali; Respondent: Yvonne Lerato Chali; Respondent: Nicolas Esais Janse van Rensburg; Respondent: Susanna Maria van Coppenhagen; Respondent: Director General Department of Home Affairs; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Bloemfontein; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds, Bloemfontein
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 October 2013
Case Number
A69/2012, 683/2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Rampai Ajp; Application for Leave to Adduce Further Evidence on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; application for leave to adduce further evidence dismissed.
Judges
M.B. Molemela, S. Ebrahim, C. Van Zyl
Legal Topics
Recognition of Customary Marriages Act, Validity of Customary Marriage, Lobola Payment, Delivery of Bride, Admission of Further Evidence, Costs Order
Family and Children Recognition of Customary Marriages Act Validity of Customary Marriage Lobola Payment Delivery of Bride Admission of Further Evidence Costs Order

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Masefako Lydia Rasello

Appellant

Matetenki Maria Chali

Respondent

Leepo Maria Chali

Respondent

Thabiso Charles Chali

Respondent

Tisetso Julia Chali

Respondent

Yvonne Lerato Chali

Respondent

Nicolas Esais Janse van Rensburg

Respondent

Susanna Maria van Coppenhagen

Respondent

Director General Department of Home Affairs

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Bloemfontein

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds, Bloemfontein

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment of Rampai Ajp; Application for Leave to Adduce Further Evidence on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a valid customary marriage was concluded between the appellant and the deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the absence of delivery of the bride in accordance with custom invalidated the alleged marriage.
  3. 3 Whether the court a quo erred in deciding the matter on the papers without referring it for oral evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the appellant failed to prove the existence of a valid customary marriage with the deceased. The absence of delivery of the bride, an essential requirement under Sesotho custom, was not refuted by the appellant. The ceremony referenced by the appellant occurred before the alleged payment of lobola and did not involve her family, thus failing to meet customary requirements. The court found that mere cohabitation and payment of lobola, without the formal handing over of the bride, did not establish a valid customary marriage. The appellant’s application to admit further evidence (the divorce decree) was dismissed as it would not affect the outcome, given the failure to...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; application for leave to adduce further evidence dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to hear further evidence at the hearing of the appeal is dismissed.
  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.