19751201 TZHC Mwanza

19751201 TZHC Mwanza

The 'mkamwana' relationship and payment of cattle did not constitute a marriage under the recognized customary law; therefore, the respondent had no rights over Robi or the children born to her while living with the appellant. The appellant is the putative father of the children and may legitimize them according to the Local Customary Law Declaration.

Citation
19751201 TZHC Mwanza
Parties
Appellant: Daniel Saayao; Respondent: Mchele s/o Marwa
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 December 1975
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Appeal
Outcome
appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Status of Children, Customary Marriage, Legitimacy, Contractual Relationships Under Customary Law
Source Language
English
Family Law Customary Law Status of Children Customary Marriage Legitimacy Contractual Relationships Under Customary Law

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Saayao

Appellant

Mchele s/o Marwa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 'mkamwana' relationship constitutes a valid marriage under the applicable customary law
  2. 2 Whether children born to Robi while living with the appellant belong to the respondent by virtue of customary law
  3. 3 Whether the payment of cattle by Nyasanda to Robi's father constituted marriage

Ratio Decidendi

The 'mkamwana' relationship and payment of cattle did not constitute a marriage under the recognized customary law; therefore, the respondent had no rights over Robi or the children born to her while living with the appellant. The appellant is the putative father of the children and may legitimize them according to the Local Customary Law Declaration.

Court Disposition

appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • The first appellate court's decision that Robi and the two children belong to the respondent is set aside.
  • The decision of the trial court is set aside.