Menu

Mkundi Legal service

Ignoracia juris, non excusat

Menu
Home Family Law family law notes in tanzania
family law notes in tanzania
by Eddo 5 years ago
family law

Includes law of ‘marriage of succession and inheritance, it deals

with how people enter into marital contract as per the Law of
Marriage Act of 1971. Law of succession i.e. Islamic law of
succession; customary law of succession statutory law of
succession.
Marriage is defined under the law of marriage Act s.9 as ‘a
voluntary union of man and woman intended to last for their
joint lives;

Therefore, there could be no temporary marriage.

Monogamous marriage is the union of one man and one
woman. In exclusion of all others. S.9 (b) i.e. marriage under
Christian religion.

Qn. Hyde vs. Hyde P&D 133

Polygomamous marriage is a union which a husband my have

more than one woman. S.59 (3)
Polyandry is where woman get married to more than one man
and it is very rare to African societies.

Marriage is Gods plan since if it were so there could be no

peace in this world.

The right to found a family among the fundamental human

right.

Marriage during pre independence people.

Nature and modes.

Customary type of marriage. Obbi defined customary marriage

as union of man and women for the duration of the women’s
life being normally the first of a wider association between two
families or sets of families

Characteristics of a customary marriage.

1. Protection of children and extension of kinship.

2. Profound interest and involvement of the families and
contracting facts in arrangement in affecting such marriage.
3. Marriage payment i.e. bride price, wealth e.t.c. this no
conducted in patrilinear society.
4. One sided exclusively sexual right of the husband on
respect of the wife, [most of customary marriage are
polygamous].

PRE CAPITALIST AFRICAN MARRIAGES

- to marry a woman was like to add source of labor

- more children more wealthy as they provide labor and
girls are marriage to add wealthy
- marriage from wideness
- More were endogamy in nature (marriage among the family
members latter changed to exogamy. ( from other families)
- concept of bride price came into place
- S.14 no one shall marry his relative i.e. mother, wife,
sister, etc.
RATIONALE FOR BRIDE PRICE;

- this was paid to legitimate child

- Bride price enable husband to have some rights from wife
and other authorities i.e. .sexual rights, kissing, hugging e.t.c.
- rights over children

Note; even if wife conceived from another man that child

belong to the husband.

Case; Amina Rashid vs. Ramadhani

Held; children born out of marriage belongs to maternal father.

CEREMONY OF MARRIAGE UNDER PRE- CAPITALIST

- A marriage without ceremony was invalid
- The whole village would participate
- Nature of marriage contracted was not of two people
- Family participates in contributing bride price bringing
food for ceremony. Most ceremonies were after harvest.
- Where a wife could not bare children a husband can marry
another wife and once the first wife conceive the children will
belong to the second wife and her husband.

TYPES OF CUSTOMARY AFRICAN MARRIAGES

1. Polygamous type. There are two forms polygamy and
poligamic

Polygamy where a man has more than one wife at the

sometime
Polyandry where a woman has more than one husband at
a time.

Importance of polygamy.

- enable the man to have more labor power

- enable man to have many children
- provide biological rational
2. Leviratic marriage; happen where the husband died and
leave the woman so young in the name of deceased brother.
The children belong to the deceased husband. She was to
accept to be married otherwise the bride price is to be
returned. If she don’t want to be married. She has to remain in
family as independent member of the family but no need to
returning the bride price. The married on return of bride price.

3. Ghost marriage. Happen where the husband died before

attaining the marriage age. The family will choose a man to
marry and bare children in his name. Rationale behind is that
the family don’t want to loose the name of the decease

4. Serorate. This kind of marriage were another woman is

provided by the parents of the barren or deceased wife to there
children for the husband or widower, to sustain kinship.

“Worry in the family matters”

FORMS OF THE SOCIETIES

 PATRILINEAL SOCIETY AND MARTRILINEAL SOCIETIES.

PATRILIANEAL SOCIETY is the one where a husband plays a

predominant part as far as the home is concerned. It is the rule
of the father. In this case the husband plays a predominant role
in the family in Tanzania this type of the society forms 80% of
the families, in England for instance till the year 1992 woman
had no say to her husband for instance the husband was free to
demand sexual intercourse from the his wife at any time
wherever he want. As in R vs. R [1992] Ac 559. Also it the right
of the husband to beat his wife with out counter resistance. I.e.
to chastises. It was the position in Tanzania also prior to
enactment of the marriage act. In which the action is the
criminal one as provided for under Section 66 of the Law of
Marriage Act.

MATRILINIAL SOCIETY as opposed to patrilianeal society are

the ones in which women are playing the predominant role as
far as families are concerned they form 20%in Tanzania
societies like mwera, makua, zaramo, kaguru, luguru, kwere,
makonde, wakwaya, kutu, tunda, zigua, doe and kulu. Other
societies who were matrilineal who later moved to patrilineal
are the wapare, wasambaa and wadigo. Other was patrilineal
societies with element of matrilineal society such as sukuma. In
most matrilineal societies man moved to women family as far
as marriage is concerned. In this case women were powerful
children also inherited from their mother lineage. Since it was
matrilineal societies children inherited from maternal parents.
The matrilineal society are also exogamous the same members
of the clan could not get married and the clan members as
opposed to endogamy. The bride price of children born out of
matrilineal society went to their mother’s family.

STATE INTERVATION IN FAMILY LAW DURING THE COLONIAL

PERIOD

During colonial period state started to intervene to regulate

family law through statute regulation. In Tanganyika for
instance the TOC which was enacted in 1920 the TOC
established high court and subordinate thereto who were
conferred with criminal and civil jurisdiction since in pre
colonial societies there were no court the Article 24 of TOC
provided that customary law was applicable in all both civil and
criminal cases except where the particular customary law is
inconsistency with justice and morality, there were also native
courts which were chaired by the chiefs, the appeal went
straight to the district officer, this is where the state
intervention came into being since the district officer belong to
the state.

THE TREND OF COLONIAL JUDGES ON AFRICAN MARRIAGE

CASES.

How did English judges defined marriage; the concept of

marriage as far as English law is concerned is summarized in the
case of Hyde vs. Hyde [1866] LR 1 PAD in this case marriage is
defined as a voluntary union between man and a women which
is intended to last for life. 3 essential element is concerned i.e.
the marriage is of two people only contrary to the pre colonial
societies marriages in which a man may marry more wives. Also
it must be intended to last for life. However there was no
uniformity in the views of judges.

The colonial judges include the English element in judging the

African cases.
1 .In Rex vs. Achoda in which one African was charged of
murder and stealing from one Indian several peaces of
evidence were adduced in court they needed corroboration in
which the only person to provide corroboration is his wife. The
wife was reluctant to give corroboration basing on principle of
compellability due to the fact that the husband and wife are
not compelled to give the evidence one another, the judge
refused to accept the argument of the wife, since for him
African marriage was not marriage. He give reasons that African
marriage were not between one man and woman and also
brutally.

2. Also in Rex vs. Owuma Achalla 1915 ULR 152 in this case
judge carter came out with the interested view about African
marriage which overruled the decision in rex vs. achoda he said
when interpreting African marriage regard heard in the local
circumstances. However in 1970 the Ugandan amended their
evidence ordinance on compellability principle provided that
for the couple not to be compelled the couple must be in
monogamous family.
3 .In Rex vs. Anukeyo [ 1917] 7 EALR 14 in this case judge
Hamilton insisted on the concept on marriage as applicable in
English law as on the concept of marriage as in Hyde vs. Hyde.
He stated that using the word marriage to African is a
misnormal the correct word is wife purchase since African
ladies are not free agent are like chattels bargain took place in
their absence and that was not the end of business the
husband can purchase more wives.

The position was settled in 1957 in the case of Maugi vs. Rex
[1957] Ac 126 also can be found in 23 EACA 609 TANZANIA
CASE in this case the privy council emphasized the point that
marriage means the monogamous marriage and restated the
principle in Hyde vs. Hyde. But it went on confided that this is
as far as English law was concerned that regards should be
heard in local circumstances when comes to the case of natives
i.e. the customary law and Islamic law applicable at that time.

Here the state started interfering the marriage issues contrary

to the pre colonial time were clans was concerned however
African marriage survived due to customary law recognition
 POSITION OF COLONIAL JUDGE ON ISLAMIC
MARRIAGES

They have the same view as customary marriage; it was also

recognized in the TOC, for those east African based in
Mombasa at that time part of Zanzibar under TOC also
established special court to deal with Islamic marriages called
the kadhi courts. Despite the recognition still the courts of
Kenya and Zanzibar were reluctant to recognize the same i.e.
the Islamic marriage. They said that they were not competent
to deal with Islamic marriage since were not taught Islamic
marriage, they could only apply English law to avoid these
trouble the Kenya established the Mohammedan Marriage
Divorce and Succession Ordinance in order to compel the judge
to use the law, started that the high court in Kenya was
competent to impose Islamic law.

In Tanganyika was a problem of Asiatic marriages especial for

those non Christian Asians since Christian were recognized
under the Christian marriage. In the case ofFatma Bacho vs.
Majothi [1946] TLR 163 the court said that it has no jurisdiction
to entertain cases arise out of non Christian.
THE EFFECTS OF UNIFICATION OF [CUSTOMARY] LAW AND
FAMILY LAW

In order to ensure the situation left by the colonialists there

has been a need for unification of the two laws

In 1969 the government issued white paper number one

[1]where it was recommended that one family law should be
enacted whereas in this law the try to recognize different
system of marriage such as Islamic, Christianity and customary
marriage.

Hence Christian marriage is similar to Hyde case was recognize

though Islamic and customary marriage was still there

CONTRACT TO MARRIAGE

A marriage is usual provided with a contract to marry or

promise to marry due to fulfill of promise this
[Notes yet to be written]

THE NATURE OF MARRIAGE IN TANZANIA

The law of marriage is basically provides two types of marriage

in Tanzania the monogamous and polygamous [under s.9, 10
together in L.M .A] monogamous marriages are those
conducted under civil ceremony and under the church.
Whereas polygamous are these which are conducted under
Islamic law and customary laws, the Islamic is limited for four
wives while customary law is unlimited one can marry many
wives.

PRELIMINARIES TO MARRIAGE

Prior to marriage there are things to be taken into account.

1. Under section 18 (1) of Law of Marriage Act. Parties must

give notice to the register of marriage at least twenty-one days
before marriage showing their intention to marriage;
2. Once the notice has been given the register shall cause the
notice to be published. As per Section 19 [publication of notice]
to the Act.
3. After publication, any party may raise and objection if any
to the register with reasons. If it is an Islamic marriage and the
husband want to marry the second wife the first wife can raise
the objection that having regards to the means of her husband
the second marriage may cause the hardship to the marriage,
also she can raise the objection that the intended wife is having
thenotorious character or the disease which can cause trouble
to the family [s.20]

If there is objection the marriage can not be conducted, but it

will be dismissed. If there is no objection it will be conducted

The forms of ceremonies

Religious, civil and customary ceremonies [section 25 of LMA]

provide for those three ways in which marriage can be
conducted in Tanzania

CIVIL MARRIAGE;
Is provided for [under s 29] which is usually conducted by the
district register and normally presumed to be a monogamous
until the contrary is proved. [The parties should opt whether
monogamous or not]

RELIGIOUS MARRIAGES; [Christian and Islamic]

1. CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE; [RC. PROTESTANTS,

PENTECOSTALS] For the RC church the marriage is
monogamous and it is among those seven sacraments, where it
is believed to be witnessed by God. For this reason the
marriage is insoluble to death they never recognize the divorce.
The same to Anglican Church, and for protestant like Lutheran
it is a covenant, the two people enter into a contract, they
actually enter into it before God. It is monogamous marriage
the church never accept divorce. Even if the divorce decree is
entered by court of law the church will not recognize it. Hyde
vs. Hyde.
2. ISLAMIC MARRIAGE; For Muslim the marriage is voluntary
union between the woman and man or woman and man it is
polygamous but should be not more that four, for them there is
a room for divorce if there is trouble in marriage. Apart from
those two elements it shares features like a marriage for life.
Except in one situation that is ‘mutta’ marriages which are
temporary in nature [specific period of time common among
Shia. Though it is a controversial issue between the Shia and
suni. Under law of marriage the mutta marriage is not allowed.
NOTE though Muslim are allowed to marry four wives, but in
order to do so, they must show that they are capable of
maintaining all the wives. Also he will treat them equally and
fairly. Also right of sexual intercourse. CASE; Bashford vs. Tully
[1971] HCD 76

CUSTOMARY MARRIAGES;

It only mentioned the Law of Marriage Act[1] but it is not

well articulated, it is the ward executive officer and divisional
executive officer who can register marriage. It is celebrated
according to custom of a particular community; it must be
recognized by customary law. It must take place among the
people who observe that particular custom. Impliedly
customary marriage is mostly conducted in villages.

NOTE; in both civil and religious marriage those who conduct

them are doing it under assisted registers and they must be
appointed in Government Gazette not in their official capacity.
[2] Position of ‘ndoa ya mkeka’ is not a valid marriage. Since
there is no intention to marry each other.

PRESUMPTION OF MARRIAGE [provided for under s. 160 (1) of

LMA]
If a man and women have lived for two years it is presumed to
be a marriage. Under common law it is ‘called a common law
wives’ they normally look for extent of period i.e. how long. The
practice developed on Tanzania where couples have lived for
several years, when the man is tired can separate. The
presumption is based on his cohabitation for two years or more
and the husband has gained the reputation to be a husband
and a wife. [Depend on how the neighbor regard the two
couples] this does not apply automatically it is only applicable
where there is a dispute i.e. marital problem between two
parties it was there to protect women. On issues of inheritance.
If the husband has died and the relative don’t allow the woman
to have inheritance.
If section 160 have been given restrictive interpretation it
would have remain a simple instrument for recovering financial
support for woman, order of child support and custody and
decrees for division of assets.

HOW DIFFERENT JUDGES INTERPRETES THE SECTION 160 OF

L.M.A OF 1971.

A good number of high courts judged bears a valid if the

presumption is not rebutted while other judges are reluctant to
accept that position.

In Salum Itandale’s case [1982] TLR 333. In this case a man

seduced the respondent daughter, impregnate her and cohabit
with her, her father demanded 5 cows as a customary refund
for elopement for her daughter 2, cow constitute customary
dowry while 3 should be down payment for bride price. The
husband did not pay and lived for almost 5 years got 3 children
later separate. The question for the custody of children came
about. Husband sued in court to recover the custody of children
Whereas Chipeta. J. held that all evidence shows full indication
of marriage. Although their status remain till regarded by court
of law.

Yonathan Guandengo vs. Constant. Daniel [1994] in this case

man applied to court to be declared a husband to his wife, by
virtue of local cohabitation but mainly he wants a share of
wife’s’ house. It was held that presumption could not arise
where there is no marital problem.

In Francis Leo vs. Paschal Maganga. [1978] LRT 22 In this case

Mfalila J. as he then was said that s.160 (1) has been a victim of
confusion and thus is does not automatically for two years to
transfer concubine into wives for presumption to raise the
parties must have under gone marriage ceremony [ not correct
interpretation of the section ]

It must also be noted that section 160 never cure defects which
go to the root of marriage [ it cannot be invoked to validate
marriage which was void abi initio] factor such as age, or where
the man has subsist marriage [monogamous] and decide to
marry again the second. The cohabitation would be for their
own peril.

Charles Uyembe vs. Mwajuma Salehe. 1982 TLR 304

Elizabeth Swaliba vs. Peter Obora [1975] LRT 225

Ramadhani Muhamed vs. Omary Ramadhani [1976] LRT 8

Elizabeth Ismail vs Haroun [1992] TLR 322

LEGAL EFFECT OF MARRIAGE

Where marriage is celebrated successfully where ceremony has

resulted to valid marriage it create some duties and right of
parties to that particular marriage. By marriage become one.
Legal existence is suspended and incorporated by legal
existence of husband lots of things a wife cannot do on her
own.

DUTIES AND RIGHT UNDER MARIAGE

1. duties to cohabit; [living together] goes hand in hand with

right to enjoy each one consortium, that is bundles of right in a
marriage like, sex, companion, sharing love intimacy, originate
from common law. i.e. the common law saw consortium will
only be enjoyed if parties are living together. If any one
interferes with rights of consortium of marriage couple. Then
either party of marriage can claim for damages. Common law
provides exception under which husband cannot claim for
damage for interference for right of consortium, i.e. when wife
goes out for sex due to quality of husband or breach of duty of
husband to provide a sexual intercourse.

POSITION IN TANZANIA
No any specific provision under law of Marriage act which
provides for duty to cohabit but section 111 of LMA it is
impliedly talks about decree of separation section 67 of LMA
expressly provides that parties to marriage may ought to have
apart by written agreement, no duty to cohabit as in Ahmad vs
Kidevu 1989 TLR 148. Wendwa Mtinangi vs Juma 1984. TLR 47.

2. Right to use husbands surname under common law the

wife has the right even after the divorce.
3. Marital confidentiality. No party to marriage is allowed to
dispose any information about other party obtained during
subsistence of marriage unless commanded by the court to do
so. If happens other party may sue the other for exposure of
secret.
4. [In evidence law] couples have the right not to be
compelled to give evidence to each other thought competent
to give evidence section 80.
5. Duty of husband to maintain the wife in two circumstances,
during subsistence and maintenance after the divorce. Law
provides that when determining question of maintenance court
shall put into account customs of community to which parties
belong section 63 of LMA and 110 of the Act. Exceptions. The
wife will only be under duty to maintain her husband if
incapacitated by mental or physical injury.
Section 110 (3) LMA, maintenance after divorce or separation
court may order husband to pay maintenance for the wife as in
Domitilla Willy vs. A.S. Willy 1976unreported. The wife petition
for divorce at the sometimes pray for and order that husband
should pay her certain amount of money for maintenance. The
husband refused because were still living under one roof and
was still providing her maintenance. Patel J. since petitioner
still living in one roof with respondent, it will be unfair for
petitioner to seek amount since was still maintained.

Samuel Maura vs. Wakavu unreported. 1975. in which the wife

a house wife petitioned for and order of maintenance ordered
to be paid by cash on monthly basis. Maganga J. held that not
propert to maintain a wife by cash who has never earned
monthly salary. Life style of couples also was taken into
consideration.

6. the right of wife to pledge her husband credit. The wife has
the right to take things on credit to be paid by her husband. The
income of the wife is not regarded section 64 of LMA. C

CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THAT RIGHT TO EXIST

Under the common law the case of Miss Gray vs. Lord Catchcart
1922 38 TLR or in Times New Law Report. 562. in which miss
Gray was a very rich woman on her own, she went to the
boutique and order expensive dresses upon delivery, husband
was to pay the husband refused. The wife had no authority to
pledge on his credit for said goods. The wife was on receipt of
allowance which was sufficient to maintain her and should not
exceed. The order was extravagant eight dresses were too
many. Marcadid J. held that, marriage in itself never give wife
the right to pledge on her husband credit it is only presumed
right t section 64 and under only necessaries of life. The test Is
always kind of life the couple are living. The husband can
negate his liability by showing the following

- He has warned credit man not to supply things on credit

to his wife.
- The wife was already supplied with sufficient of those
goods.
- The wife was supplied with sufficient allowance or that
she has sufficient means to buy her own goods without
pledging on credit.
- The husband can forbid wife not to pledge on his credit.
- The order though was of necessaries of life, it was excessive
and regarding to husband income it was extravagant thus no
liability to pay a bill. Section 64 of LMA is based on this case
though is much wider than the English position on as gives wife
to sell immovable property of her husband to buy her
necessaries of the life.

ADULTERY AND RIGHT TO COMPENSATION

A male person is committing adultery when she or he is having

an affair with the third party out of the marriage. Under
common law damages for adultery are available. Under the
following principles;

1. Damages should not be punitive but compensatory.

2. Damages should be actual loss depend on actual value of
woman if wife is not prostitute.
3. Damage may base on peculiar loss and loss of right of
consortium.

POSITION IN TANZANIA.
Section 72 up to 75 of LMA different tribes with different
character customs and tradition should be taken into
consideration, for example among the Maasai is not a problem.
For Sukuma a number of cattle is paid. When assessing damage
for adultery one must be carefully.

1. We should not impose English culture in Tanzania which

have mixed culture.
2. Damages should be in discretion of the court since it is
difficulty to assess the same.
3. Damage is only compensatory and not punitive.
4. Damage should not be awarded if proved wife conniver i.e.
consenting with the husband to commit adultery, on either of
party.
5. To condone to adultery is to keep quit with knowledge of
one party being committed adultery

In Jumainne Jingi s Joka Kiduda. 1984 TLR 51. in which

Lugakingira J. Said, damage is only payable when there is only
valid marriage. Suits under section 72 (2) shall be dismissed if
defendant satisfy court that he or she did not and could not by
exercise of reasonable diligent had known that person with
whom one committed the acts of adultery was married.

Gaipensulle vs Sumi Magoye 1984 TLR 289 in which

Mwalusanya J said that, it is not that law that there should be
direct evidence of person to be called fragrant delicto. In order
to prove adultery, since it is very rare to find such situation.
Only circumstantial evidence that one has done it.
Circumstantial evidence is enough. In assessing damages for
adultery the court shall take into account customs of the
community to which parties belong. As in Juma Misanya v.
Lister Durumay 1987 TLR 22. no damage of adultery under
presumption of marriage. As in Zakaria Lugendo vs Shadrack
1987 TLR 31.

NULLITY OF MARRIAGE

English common law is used prior to reformation English

marriages were based to Catholics which were binding to all

After reformation few changes were made though issue of

nullity remained church has no devorce. It is prepared to agree
that there are circumstances which hinder nullity. Divorce
differs from decree of annulment.

Divorce is where a valid subsisting marriage while decree of

annulment is to the effect that there is initial impediment
preventing formation of valid marriage into its fullest sense.

Two circumstances in which a marriage annulity may be done.

1. where a marriage is void

2. Where a marriage if avoidable.

Void marriage means that the ceremony did not create

marriage at all. I.e. void abi initio. S. 38 of LMA whereas
voidable marriage are one in which although imperfect but
regarded as valid subsisting marriage until annulled by the
court of law
Dereneville vs. Dereneville [1948] ALR 56

GROUNDS UPON WHICH A MARRIAGE IS DECLARED VOID

Section 38 provides for those grounds;

1. Where parties are of the same sex. As in Cobert vs. Cobert

[1970] WLR 1306 in which a defendant, Mr. Ashling decided to
change his sex by severing his male organs and fixing female
organs. It was successfully done. Thus she become a courier
model, latter she got married to a man who did not know all
this parts; but letter on he discovered that he was not a really
woman. It was held that sex is biological fixed at birth can not
changed artificially. Thus Ashling cannot by no way be a woman
2. Also if parties who practice marriage are within prohibited
relationships as provided by section 14 of LMA also in the case
of Michael Mangare vs. Mangana [1976] LRT 19 and Fatma
Massoud vs. Massoud [1977] LRT 3.
3. Where either party to that marriage is below the age for
marriage. As inAlhaji Muhamed vs. Knott [1968] 2ALR 563 in
which alhaji a Nigerian married 14 years of age girl, according
to the Nigerian it was a valid marriage, they went to England
where validity of marriage was disputed. Also in the case of
Pugh vs. Pugh Neville [1961] 2ALL 680
4. Where there is a valid subsisting marriage especially
monogamous .later on purport to have the second marriage
thus the latter is void abi initio. InRamadhani Said vs. Mohamed
Kilu in which couples were in conflict. Decide to separate for
long time, a woman believed that they were dully divorced, she
contracted another marriage, it was held that the second
marriage was void abi initio, a mere fact that decided separate
is not regarded as divorce only a court of law can divorce. As In
King vs. King [1963] 3ALL 561;Hayward vs. Hayward[1961] ALL
236; Kassim vs. Kassim [1962] 3 ALL 426
5. Another grounds may include where consent to either
parties was not freely given
6. marriage express to be temporary in nature it is void abi
initio
7. If a wife married in Islamic form and contracts another
before expire period of Islamic customary month called ‘idda’,
rationale behind is to find out if she can be pregnant.

GROUNDS UPON WHICH MARRIAGE CAN BE HELD

VOIDABLE.
1. Either parties to the marriage are incapable of
consummating the marriage;marriage is consummated by first
act of sexual intercourse after celebration of marriage. E.g.
when a man is impotent either part may seek this decree. Even
capable as in Harthan vs. Harthan [1948] 2 ALL 644, sexual
intercourse before marriage is irrelevant but never amount to
consummation. Also in Dredge vs. Dredge. [1947] 1 ALL 29.

the purpose of consummation, sexual intercourse should be

complete and ordinary; it should not be partial by artificial
means i.e. full penetration in ordinary means.

In Baxter vs. Baxter [1947] 2ALL 886 in which the wife did not
allow husband to do sex without contraceptive sheaths because
she did not want children, otherwise no sex was allowed
without sheath. Husband sought decree of nullity under ground
that marriage did not consummate. It was held that the use of
sheath is by law means only method of contraception in
common use. They could use other method such as pills.
In Coen vs. Coen [1945] 2ALL 197 also in Mohamed Ndetwa vs.
Hamisi Omari [1988] TLR 137 in which In the Primary Court, the
appellant won his claim for recovery of dowry and various
traditional payments plus costs of the suit, on the ground that
his wife had unreasonably refused to consummate the
marriage. The respondent appealed to the District Court of
Kondoa and the appellant was awarded just restitution of bride
price. Hence this appeal against the decision of the District
Court. Held: Once a marriage has taken place any gifts,
whether traditional or otherwise, given in contemplation of the
marriage become the absolute property of the recipient and it
cannot be diverted by subsequent divorce: s.7 of the Law of
Marriage Act of 1971, which also supersedes rules of
customary or Islamic law.

Incapacity to consummate marriage. In W vs. W [1967] 3 ALL

178 in which a husband was able to penetrate his wife but as
soon as the penis enters, it collapse in the vagina and come out.
It was held that marriage was not consummated.

In order for petition to succeed on ground of incapacity to

consummate it is important at the time of hearing and that
impotency is incurable in the sense that either it cannot be
cured even if operation is taken is likely to succeed. In S vs. S
[1954] 3 ALL 736. In which a wife’s hymen was so thick that it
prevented a full penetration by the husband, the husband
suggest that she could seek medical advice but he could not
take her to any doctor. Letter he went to live with another
woman and sought decree of annulment.
The issue was whether she was incapable at the day of hearing.
It was held that, consummation was improbable but due to fact
that husband was living with another woman, operation was
possible to make her able to penetrate.

NOTE: ejaculation and incapacity for woman to conceive are

irrelevant. As R vs. R [1967] 1 ALL 1194. It was held that there
may be no ejaculation provided there is penetration,
consummation is complete.

S vs. S [1962] 3 ALL 55. A woman was incapable of conceiving

since she had no uterus. Husband petition for decree of
annulment. Incapacity was irrelevant.

PROPERTY RIGHT BETWEEN COUPLES DURING MARRIAGE

Property relation is among legal effect of marriage

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AT COMMON LAW

It is the duty for the husband to maintain the wife and wife can
even sue the husband for failure to do so. Even this duty at
common law in the past, one a woman was married she was
required to surrender all her properties to her husband, since it
is the duty of husband to maintain the wife the husband
become the trustee of wife’s property

Due to life stress it was observed that men died earlier than
women. When the husband died all the property was vested to
wife and children but it arose the problem when the wife was
the first to die. That when the wife dies first all the property
were vested to children and the property were taken form the
possession of husband even if the matrimonial property home
is the place where couple usually reside belong to wife were
taken to children. As a result, reforms were made to the law,
the law changed and made women property act of [1882] was
enacted under this act the position was the married woman has
the right to own property obtained prior and after the
marriage. [Still the position in UK to date]
THE POSITION IN TANZANIA

Section 56 of LMA. [Provide that woman has the right to

acquire property as man did] under the law of marriage act are
divided into two

Personal property section 58 of LMA. This section recognizes

the existence of separate property of husband and those of
wife. I.e. marriage does not change ownership of property
acquired before the marriage. It does not prevent spouse from
owning, acquiring or disposing property during subsistence of
marriage.Abdallah Shamte vs Mussa 1972 HCD 9

Joined property; joint property of married couple includes

matrimonial home and other property jointly acquired during
subsistence of marriage. Section 2 of LMAdefines matrimonial
home. Matrimonial home is presumed to be under ownership
of couple neither of parties can alienate one self without the
consent of …section 59 (1) LMA the same position is reflected
under Land Act Section 114[as amended] 2004 according to
these provision if there is not such consent from the other part
in case of creation of mortgage then the mortgage will be
considered invalid in eyes of law.
 OTHER MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY

Section 60 of LMA provide for presumption of property

acquired during the subsistence of marriage if the property is in
the name of husband and wife then there shall be rebut able
presumption that the beneficial interest there in are equal if it
is the name of husband alone or wife alone there shall be
rebutable presumption that the property belong absolutely to
that person whose name appear to that property

Bi Hawa Muhamed vs. Ally Sefu [1983] TLR 62 The appellant

and respondent were wife and husband respectively until the
dissolution of their marriage by a court decree of the Primary
Court of Ilala District at Kariakoo, Dar es Salaam in 1980. In
subsequent proceedings the Primary Court held that the
appellant was not entitled to any share in the matrimonial
assets as she was a mere wife and that the house was bought
by the husband's money. On appeal to the High Court, the
Primary Court's decision was substantially upheld. This is a
second appeal.
Held:
(i) Since the welfare of the family is an essential component of
the economic activities of a family man or woman it is proper to
consider contribution by a spouse to the welfare of the family
as contribution to the acquisition of matrimonial or family
assets;
(ii) the "joint efforts" and 'work towards the acquiring of the
assets' have to be construed as embracing the domestic
"efforts' or "work" of husband and wife;
(iii) where a spouse commits a matrimonial mis-conduct which
reduced to nothing her contribution towards the welfare of the
family and consequential acquisition of matrimonial or family
assets she or he would not be entitled to a share in the
property.

Rimmer vs. Rimmer [1952] 2 ALL 863 , Cobb vs. Cobb. [1955] 2
All 696 , Button vs. Button [1968] 1WLR 457 Miriam Tumbo vs.
Harold Tumbo. Family Law - Petition for Divorce - Requirement
of reference to Marriage Conciliatory Board prior to petition - S.
101 of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971. F
Family Law - Divorce - Evidence of breakdown of marriage -
Cruelty - Constructive desertion - Adultery - S. 107 of the law of
Marriage Act, 1971.
Family Law - Custody of children - Welfare of infant children -
Independent opinions of children- Age of children to be taken
into account. Family Law - Division of matrimonial assets -
Meaning of work towards the acquisition of assets- Whether
housekeeping is contribution to acquisition of matrimonial
assets. The parties to this proceeding were married under
Christian rites in 1958 and have seven issues of the marriage.
The petitioner sought dissolution of marriage alleging adultery,
cruelty and desertion. She also prayed for custody of the
youngest five children and for the division of assets. The
respondent has cross-petitioned for divorce, alleging cruelty I
and desertion. He also prayed for custody of the youngest
three children.
LUGAKINGIRA J
Held: (i) Under paragraph (f) of the proviso to s. 101 of the Law
of Marriage Act, 1971 the court may dispense with reference
to the Marriage Conciliatory Board where it is satisfied that
there are extraordinary circumstances which make reference
impracticable;
(ii) it is one thing to tolerate a spouse's misconduct, it is
another to put up with the consequences thereof; in
contemplation of this the legislature enacted s. 85 of the Law of
Marriage Act, 1971 that evidence of misconduct by a husband
or a wife shall not be inadmissible in any matrimonial
proceeding on the ground that the misconduct was condoned
by the aggrieved spouse;
(iii) when reprehensible conduct or departure from the
normal standards of conjugal kindness causes injury to health
or an apprehension of it, it is cruelty if a reasonable person,
after taking due account of the temperament and all the other
particular circumstances, would consider that the conduct
complained of is such that this spouse should not be called on
to tolerate it;
(iv) it is settled that where one spouse behaves in such a
manner that the other is virtually compelled to leave, the
former may in law be the deserter; it is imperative for there to
be conduct which amounts to dismissal from the consortium;
(v) in matters of custody the welfare of the infant is of
paramount consideration, but where the infant is of an age to
express an independent opinion, the court is obliged to have
regard to his or her wishes;
(vi) in accordance with s. 114(2) (b) of the Law of Marriage
Act, 1971, the court is required in exercising its power of
division of assets to have regard to the extent of contributions
made by each party in money, property or work towards the
acquiring of the assets; housekeeping is a conjugal obligation
and cannot be equated to work which refers to the physical
participation in the production of the asset itself.
Order accordingly. Cases referred to:
1. Khan v Khan [1973] LRT n. 57.
2. Russell v Russell [1897] A.C. 395 (H.L.).
3. Gollins v Gollins [1963] 2 All E.R. 966. H
4. Buchler v Buchler [1947] 1 All E.R. 319.
5. Marwa v Akeyo [1977] L.R.T. n. 39.

DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE.

Means bringing marriage to an end. Usually by action of court.

CAUSES
1. By death of either of parties; section 12 LMA, 12 By 5 days
disappear.
2. By divorce granted by the court; section 16 and 94.
In case of death the parties are called widow or widower for
wife and husband respectively while in case of divorce they are
called divorcee.

Divorce is when marriage brought to an end by court decree.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF DIVORCE.

In Hyde vs. Hyde in England and in Europe divorce was not

accepted, when the church gave way to secular is when the
divorce was initiated.

However Roman did not accept divorce only secular law

recognize. In 1850 during that time in England divorce was an
issue in 1850 discussion was established for 18 years in 1856
and 1857 Matrimonial Causes Act was passed allowed expressly
grant of divorce. Decree of divorce operates as punishment to a
party who is at faulty. After 1838 there was more to change a
law than law to punish the sinners after World War there were
further changes following those 1951 a commission was formed
called Morton Commission 1951 duted with changing law in
England and Britain recommended matrimonial offenses should
be abolished came up with report called Putting Down
Assunder which had softer approach to divorce law.

The recommendations were as follows.

1. Instead of matrimonial offenses such as adultery, cruelty,
and desertion. Should be one ground for divorce, and that
ground was that a marriage has broken down irreparably.
2. Only court to decide upon evidence under exclusive power
to grant divorce.
3. The court in determine it shall look beyond the offenses
committed such as adultery, desertion, and cruelty since
adultery is a sign that marriage has irreparably broken down. In
its own cannot stand but those should be other reasons.
4. Surrounding environment should be glanced at large,
history and background also matter.
5. The court must carry a detailed and through inquiry to facts
and cause of marriage death. Called a social postmortem. Of
marriage. A name of process ‘put asunder’
the royal reform commission for consideration came about
with another recommendations called ‘freedom of choice’ in
1969 reform stated that, there is a need for having a divorce
law in England and provided for criteria for a good divorce law.
The recommendations were;

1. good law should seek remedy rather undermining the

stability of marriage institution
2. .
3. When regrettably a marriage is irreparable broken down
but when happen such law should able to allow legal shelf to be
destroyed with maximum fairness and with minimum
bitterness and humiliation and distress.

There should be a balance e between maintenance and support

and allowed to be and end only if is inevitable.
The rationale is an individual affair, the union between two
couples. Stability is a public affair.

Marriage is broken and then should be given a decent burial

nothing should be done not only couples but children too.
Dignity, decency and harmony should be a paramount
important thing to consider such as matrimonial distribution of
property. .

In 1969 the Divorce Act was born due to the two prior
commission, introduced marriage down principle and abolished
the reason e.g. matrimonial offenses the ground was
irreparable broken down of marriage.

To date in England there is only one ground that is marriage has

broken down irreparably.

In Uganda and Kenya, law applicable prior to 1938 divorce was

considered as a punishment to party at faulty that is a law
applicable in Uganda to date, still have matrimonial offenses.
The same position is shared in Kenya, in which old English law
of divorce recognizes matrimonial offenses.

In Tanzania, LMA to a greater extent based on English Divorce

Act of 1969 only one ground of divorce unlike Kenya and
Uganda, that is marriage has broken down irreparable
JURISDICTION OF MATRIMONIAL CASES

FACTORS WHICH TO PROVE THAT THE MARRIAGE HAS BROKEN

DOWN IRRETRIVABLY. [Irreparable].Section 107 (2) of LMA
provides for this factors,

1. ADULTERY. section 107 (2) (a) in Tanzania adultery is of

two different approaches, may attract payment of
damages[compensation] also can be used to prove the fact that
the marriage has broken down irreparable in Kenya and
Uganda adultery stand independent ground for divorce and the
law never provide damage for adultery. No one has ever
attempted to define adultery but in Denis vs. Denis [1965] 2 All
ER 51 in which the man was sexually impotent but were caught
fragrante delittle with the woman with whom he has
committed adultery Mr., justice Synditone said that ‘I don’t
think that adultery is proved without penetration it is not
necessary the complete sexual intercourse take place but
penetration of a man to a woman is enough to prove adultery.
He further remarked that if a man and woman are attached
together, take off their apparel and lie together there will arise
the presumption of adultery and in most cases it may be
difficult to rebut it but the inference can be rebutted if the man
is found to be impotent. Also adultery must be consetual
between the adultery. Where the married woman is raped she
has not committed adultery it can be defined as sexual
intercourse between two person of whom one or both are
married but who are not married to each other so any degree
of penetration however slight will suffice to amount to
adultery. DANIEL MLINGWA v MWAJA MKOTYO 1997 TLR 39
(HC) Court High Court of Tanzania - Dar es Salaam. The
appellant had sued the respondent in the Primary Court at
Dodoma for C adultery, claiming seven head of cattle as
compensation. The trial court held that the respondent had
committed adultery with appellant's lawful wife and awarded
three head of cattle as compensation. The District Court on
appeal held that there was no valid marriage between the
appellant and PW 2. In a further appeal Held
(i)That there was no serious dispute that there was a valid
marriage contracted under customary rites between the
appellant and PW 2;
 ii) That the magistrate who had sat in the first appeal had
erred when he said that payment of a dowry was a necessary
prerequisite to validate a marriage. Non-payment of dowry did
not invalidate an otherwise valid marriage.
Appeal allowed and decision of Primary Court restored.
Cases referred to:
Lalata Msangawe v Henry Mwamlima [1979] LRT No 3
Circumstances in which adultery can be proved.

(a) Spending a night in the hotel. Graspin vs. Graspin 1952 2

All E.R 349.

(b) Visiting brothel. [DANGURO] England vs. England 1953 2

All E.R 784.
(c) Conviction of bigamy. Holinton vs. Holinton 1943 KB 597,
Kambunga vs. Lugaijamu 1972 HCD 19 .
(d) Birth of a child,
(e) Cohabitation with third party. Mariam Tumbo v. Haroud
Tumbo
(f) Venereal diseases.
 (g) Confession.
However suspicion by itself won’t suffice, the court will not act
on that there must be irresistible inference leads to adultery. It
is difficulty to prove for adultery. Adultery as evidence of
marriage broken down irreparable it does not automatically
leads to divorce even where it is proved the court must look at
the circumstances of the case and look out whether the
marriage has broken down irreparable it also depend on the
circumstance of each case. [adultery may be there but marriage
may be retrieved] vs. Cleary it was said that the petitioner may
rely not only on the adultery, but also on any other matter, to
show that father cohabitation would be intolerable, in this case
the husband took the wife back after adultery but the wife
continued to correspond with the man with whom she
committed adultery she went out with him at night finally she
left her husband and went to leave with her mother so that she
can meet he man. The husband stated he could no longer leave
with her since there is not future for the marriage at all. Held
that he had established irretrievable breakdown of the
marriage notwistanding that he found life with her intolerable
not on account of adultery but on account of he subsequent
conduct.
Mariamu Tumbo vs. Harold Tumbo [1983] TLR 293 The
Petitioner was a wife claimed on adultery, desertion and
cruelty , on adultery she alleged that the husband was
cohabiting with the second the woman thought true of
cohabitation the husband did not deny but he pleaded
condonation [the other party has the knowledge but she or he
kept quiet ] in this case in respect of ground the court stated ‘I
have no hesitation in finding that there was condo nation, the
petitioner might have initial felt slight humiliated and offended
when the respondent took on the second woman but in the
end she became reconciled to it and tolerated it taking no step
to register her protest and for four years from 1977 to 1981 she
voluntarily submitted to respondent in embraces thereby
registering her forgiveness she can not now be held to
complain. [Ground of adultery wasn’t accepted]
STANDARD OF PROOF OF ADULTERY [camps of thoughts].
There has been considered judicial controversy over the
standard of proof of adultery. Other says that the standard of
proof of adultery should be like that of criminal i.e. beyond
reasonable doubt, the parties must be caught red handed while
other says the proof should be like that of civil case i.e. based
on balance of probabilities.
 In Smith vs. Smith the it was held so far at least as British
Columbia is concerned the standard of proof required to prove
adultery in a divorce action where the legitimacy of children is
not in question is the civil standard of proof by preponderance
of evidence rather than the criminal standard of proof beyond
reasonable doubt.
Blyth vs. Blyth [1966] 1 All E.R 524.
Bastable vs. Bastable [1968] 3 All E.R 701.
All in all the standard of proof in adultery cases on matter of
divorce needs its own standard of proof.

2. CRUELTY; section 107 ( c) of LMA Just like adultery cruelty

is also not capable of precise definition in Gollins vs. Gollins
1963] 2 ALL ER 966 it was stated in Mariamu Tumbo vs. Harold
Tumbo[3] that, it is impossible to give the comprehensive
definition of cruelty but when the reprehensible conduct or
departure from the normal standard of conjugal kindness
causes injury to health or and apprehension at it, it is I think
cruelty if a reasonable person after taking due account of the
temperament, and all other particular circumstances would
consider that the conduct complained off is such that this pause
should not be called on to tolerate. Therefore even
apprehension of danger suffices if prove the one who will prove
his intention will be crueltyalso in BROMLEY Family Law 3 Ed
Page 95 ‘ there is no need for the injury to be actually suffered,
a reasonable apprehension of injury will result if the conduct is
persisted in will suffice for the court will not wait for the
petitioner to be actual injured before affording him or her relief
in Said Mohamed vs. Zena Ally 1985 TLR 13 in which the
respondent petition the divorce on ground of cruelty in primary
court where she failed on appeal in District Court she won the
case the husband appeal in the high court. The husband was in
habit of biting the wife and threatens to kill her and he once
strike her naked in font of other people including her in laws.
Held that, by Lubuva j. the appellant conduct of not only biting
but also undressed the wife in front of other people generally
and her father in law in particular was and embracing and
distressing act for cruelty which inflicted considerable physical
and mental torture to respondent.
Juliana Mazengo vs. Jackson Leganga [1986] TLR 244. NOTE.
Reasonable wear and tear is acceptable between married
couples. In Mc Ewan vs. Mc Ewan[1946] [READ THE WHOLE
CASE] in which Lord Denning observed, married couples have
the put up with all the nexatins the quarrels and the troubles
which are ordinary incidents of the marriage life. They have
taken each other for better and for worse, they must put up
with temperament and deflects of character of each other but
there may come a time when defects of character or
temperament may be such as to amount to cruelty but it all
depends on the facts of the case. Similarly, it is common ground
to expect misunderstanding in the marriage life which may
culminate in person assaulting his or her spouse , if such
incidents occur, and a person twice assaulted ones spouse I
don’t think that alone would be suffice to justify a reasonable
tribunal to conclude that the marriage vows have been torn
apart beyond repaired. The marriage bond or contract for such
matter sanctity as it should not be set aside lightly in the
absence so evidence that the same has founded beyond repair.
Charles Auko vs. Regina 1984 TLR 44.
WILLIAMS VS. WILLIAMS 1963 2 All ER 994.
COLBERG VS. COLBERG 1961 EA 431.
MARIAM TUMBO VS. HAROLD TUMBO. Note that malpractices
in sexual intercourse amount to cruelty but depends the
circumstances of each case. If either party is engage in UN
natural offense even with the third party amount to cruelty e.g
sodomy lesbians.
Gadner Vs. Gadner 1947 1 All ER. 630;
Caskett VS. Casket 1950 1 All ER 677;
Walshan Vs. Walshan 1949 1 All ER 744,
3. DESERTION: is another factor to prove marriage broken
down irreparably, courts has declined in defining desertion
however, desertion can be defined as separation of one spouse
from the other with an intention on the party of deserting
spouse to bring cohabitation permanently to an end without
reasonable course and without the consent of the other
spouse. But this definition lacks some aspects since in law there
are simple and constructive desertions.
Simple desertion is physical separation where one party decides
to leave the matrimonial home without intention to come back.
While constructive desertionoccurs where one spouse does not
actual leave the house but he or she conducts oneself in such
as way that make the other party leave the matrimonial home.
The deserted party is the one who has left the matrimonial
home. In Tanzania the period determines desertion by spouse
in marriage at least three years. Section 107 (2) (e) of LMA. In
Uganda two years. In Kenya at least three years.

There are four elements in desertion

1. Physical Separation.[factum]
2. The intention to desert permanently [animus desevendi]
3. Without Reasonable Cause.
4. Without the Consent of the Other Spouse.

For this purpose every case is to be decided in its own merit.

Since the court must look at the conduct of the parties in each
particular case. However sometimes factum among the four
element may be disregarded. Since there are situation in which
the parties may leave under the same roof but there is
desertion. This is where one party to the marriage decides to
forfeit conjugal rights [it is desertion in eyes of law]
In Buchler vs. Buchler [1947] 1All E.R 319 in which the House of
Lords denied the wife’s’ a decree of divorce on the ground of
constructive desertion thought husband conduct caused the
wife intense unhappiness. The husband establish an
remarkable association with a man in his office as friend to
extent of ignoring his wife it was held that, the conduct did not
justify the wife in treating it as dismissal from the consortium
and in leaving the matrimonial home. Lord Green in this case
said.’ constructive desertion therefore requires both factum
and animus desevendi and an indication by the husband to the
wife that she may leave if she likes [anumus] is not enough
unless the conduct is such as to amount to an expulsion
[factum] the mere wish to expel even if it exists without acts
equivalent to its expulsion is in my opinion insufficient to
constitute constructive desertion

Weggary vs. Weggary [1947] AC 628

Smith vs. Smith 1949 4 All ER. 533
Pardy vs. Pardy 1939 3 ALL ER 779
Patel vs. Patel 1965 EA 560
Rex vs. Said [1948] EACA 110

BURDEN OF PROOF AND STANDARD OF PROOF ON

DESERTION

The burden of proof lies upon the party who alleges desertion
by the other party he or she has to show that there is desertion
without reasonable cause and one has never consented to
desertion.

The standard of proof of that to balance of probabilities like the

one in civil cases.In Tanzania the period determines desertion
by spouse in marriage at least three years. Section 107 (2) (e) of
LMA. In Uganda two years. In Kenya at least three years.
In Mariamu Tumbo vs. Harold Tumbo[4]. In which the
petitioner was the wife alleged desertion on the ground that
the prevailing cruelty physical and mental of her husband made
her to leave the matrimonial house, thus she alleges
constructive desertion the court found that, the respondent is
on constructive desertion but since it was only for period one
year it was not the ground Lugakingira J. as he then was stated.
The petitioners’ departure from matrimonial home was not
prompted merely by incompatibility of temperament and
unhappiness in the matrimonial relationship the petitioner was
the victim of persistent physical and mental cruelty the conduct
of respondent amounted to the dismissal of the petitioner from
the consortium. On the other hand his persistent invitation to
the petitioner to leave his apparent pleasure at her departure
and his failure to induce her to return are evidences of an
intention to bring cohabitation to an end there was a factum as
well as the animus I am satisfied the construction was in
satisfied desertion . I am aware thought under our law
desertion is not a ground for divorce unless it has persisted for
at least 3 yrs. prior to the presentation of petition. In our case
the period is one year I believe to be irrelevant to make finding
in the issue since in our country proof in matrimonial offense
[i.e. adultery cruelty] would not by itself entitle a spouse to a
decree of divorce and therefore a failure to prove such offence
would not by itself disentitle a spouse to a decree of divorce
what is relevant is whether the marriage has broken down
irreparably.

In this case divorce was granted because the marriage was

broken down irreparable also by considering of the whole
situation of the marriage and cruelty.

SPECIAL FEATURES OF DIVORCE LAW IN TANZANIA.

Section 99 provides for right to petition for divorce. Section 109

provides for principle braking down of marriage. Section 107
provides factors to prove marriage broken down irreparable.
Section 108 duty of the court to inquire whether the marriage
has broken 110 provides the nature of broken down

However the principle of broken down of marriage irreparably

has been misconceived by judged in Tanzania most judges think
that if one of 3 ground is alleges then automatically the divorce
is granted which is not solely ground for that.
In Joseph Warioba Butiku vs. Perus Uganda [1987] TLR 1

In this case both parties pleaded that the marriage has broken
down irreparably there sought divorce both parties agreed to
be divorced. Biron J. held the petitioner in his petition and the
respondent in her answer established that the marriage has
irreparably broken down as both asset it has and each spouse is
praying for a divorce consequently. I have note the slightest
hesitation in formerly finding that, the marriage has in fact and
in law irreparable broken down, accordingly the marriage has
dissolved.

LIMITATION TO DIVORCE.
[CONDITION TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO GRANT OF DIVORCE.]

1. Before filing the petition for divorce one must go to

Conciliation Board. Section 101, to 104 of LMA. If the board
failed it will issue certificate to show failure. The petitioner will
go with the certificate before the court. Sometimes the parties
may go strait to the court and file petition if there is exceptional
circumstances. But are not mentioned though may include if
one party go to reconciliation board and the other party is not
appearing many occasion. Also where there is cruelty the court
may consider without the board certificate ATHANAS
MAKUNGWA v DARINI HASSANI [1983] TLR 132 (HC) 1983 TLR
132, This is an appeal against the judgment of the District Court
at Kisutu in which the learned District Magistrate reversed the
judgment of Kinondoni Primary Court and granted divorce to
the respondent in this appeal. The Primary Court had dismissed
the petition on the ground that there was no reference to the
Conciliation Board prior to the filing of the suit. The District
Court had found that the marriage between the parties had
irreparably broken down and that exhibit 3 (which was in the
form of a letter) in the trial court was a document from the
Conciliation Board showing that the matter had been referred
to them. The main issues on appeal are whether the marriage
had broken down irreparably and whether the matter was
referred to the Conciliation Board prior to the filing of the
petition for divorce in the Primary Court.
Held: (i) Where the petition is founded exclusively on the
petitioner's own wrong-doing I in the absence of any special
reason a divorce decree should not be granted; in this case the
petition of divorce was not held since they did not go to the
reconciliation board.
2. One can not file a petition for divorce in Tanzania unless two
years of marriage has expired. section 100 of LMA however the
section says petition for divorce may be filed regardless the
couple has lived more yrs but exceptional hardships.
3. The petition for divorce wont be granted if the ground for
divorce is founded on petitioner own wrong doing. Faults. In
Atanas Makungwa vs. Darini Hasanithe evidence adduced was
the appellant the husband told the respondent he was tired of
her and that he no longer enjoys sex life with her. But on the
other hand the husband said that the wife insisted on getting
the’ talak’ on him else she would stab him with the knife, the
wife used to sleep out of matrimonial home with other man,
the wife petition for divorce. It was held that. The respondent
wife did not in her evidence proved any matrimonial offense
against the appellant on the contrary the matrimonial offense
appears to have been referred to in the case is said to have
been committed by the respondent wife. i.e. sleeping with
other man it would appear then the petition is founded in
exclusively in the responded wrong doing and that if that
happens, in the absence of not any special reason the divorce
decree should not be granted.
4. collusion; s. 37 of LMA, this is where the parties to a
divorce petition procure the institution of the suit by an
agreement to hide facts or fabricate certain false facts in order
to procure the dissolution of marriage. Noble vs. Noble 1964 2
All E.R 557.
5. condonation; this happens where the facts are known to
other spouse and decides to forgive and the life continued if
proved the party condoned can not be held to petition on
divorce on the ground. Knowledge of the offense committed,
there must be forgiveness. Both parties must be aware of each
others intention to forgive. There can also be condo nation
where one may keep quiet it implies condo nation also. Refer
the case of Mariam Tumbo. Section 86.
6. Connivance; this factor applies in adultery; the parties to
marriage may conny to adultery. Types of connivance. Active.
Wife and husband actual agree to adultery and passive where
one couple agrees and accepts and not sure that one is right.
I.e. Fifty fifty. But this must be distinguished from mere
negligence or over confidence i.e. the husband is
overconfidence that his wife can not do that, it can not be
called [connivance] in Richmond vs. Richmond 1952 1 ALL ER.
138. In which two couple went for a caravan holiday and
decided to swap their wife. But as far as holiday caravan was
concerned after the caravan holiday they assumed that the
swapping was over Mr. Buffet continued with Richmond. Mrs.
Richmond petitions the divorce in the case of adultery. Held, it
was not proper to separate the caravan and after caravan
event. There was connivance since what is relevant was the fact
that one first consented and fact that they continued is
immaterial. Divorce therefore cannot apply.

Dening L j; Bebirfield a Barens 1952 2 ALL ER. 237 at 243.

[Question 2 of family law. GN No. 279 OF [1963] Provides that,

payment of bride price is not essential to valid marriage,].GN
No. 279 of 1963 has overridden customary law over the validity
of payment of bride price]

12th December, 2006.

ISLAMIC DIVORCE

As much as we know the law of marriage act in Tanzania is the

unification of different belief, customs, laws therefore it has
recognize procedure in which the marriage can dissolve.
Section 107 (3)

Condition for Islamic divorce

1. Parties must be married in an Islamic form.
2. must also go to reconciliation board
3. One of part must have pronounced talak. Or must have
done act under which under Islamic dissolve the marriage. But
it should be proved by the court.

TYPES OF DIVORCE UNDER ISLAMIC LAW.

[Which act the party can do to amount to divorce]

1. talak divorce, is an arbitrary act of husband to divorce a

wife,
2. mubaraat divorce, is divorce by agreement, the parties to
Islamic marriage agree to cease to be husband and wife
3. Khula divorce; this is done by the wife making the payment
for a certain amount or in form of valuable property to her
husband to buy her release. After payment he will pronounce a
talak. the act itself Is called ‘kului’
4. Ila divorce is where a husband swears not to have a marital
intercourse with the wife thus the wife may take it as a
withdrawal advantage from conjugal rights.

It suffices to say that where one party has done an act amount
to divorce, the court must find out that the marriage has
broken down irreparable. The court must however insure that
the marriage has broken down irreparable.

BIBIE MAULID VS MUHAMED IBRAHIM [1989] TLR 162. The

parties were married under Islamic Law in 1979. In 1986 the
respondent issued talaka in accordance with Islamic Law. Their
dispute had been referred to a Marriage Conciliation Board
which certified that it had failed to reconcile the spouses and
the Primary Court granted a decree of divorce. On appeal to a
District Court, at the instance of the husband it was held that
there was no evidence that the marriage had broken down
irreparably and the decree of divorce and the order of division
of matrimonial assets was set aside. Appellant now appeals to
High Court.

Held:
(i) The Principal District Magistrate had apparently overlooked
the provisions of section 107(3) of the Law of Marriage Act
1971;
(ii) once the Marriage Conciliation Board has certified that it has
failed to reconcile the spouses, and a talaka has been issued,
then the court has to find that the marriage has irreparably
broken;
(iii) there must be evidence to show the extent of contribution
before making an order for distribution of matrimonial assets;
(iv) Performance of domestic duties amounts to contribution
towards such acquisition but not necessarily 50%.

IN which parties in 1979 married under Islamic law. In 1986 the

husband issued a talaka after passed a reconciliation board. The
primary court did not solve the matter on the ground that there
is no evidence that the marriage has broken down
irreparable .they appealed to district and last appeal court.
Held Mainer J. found district magistrate overlooked the
provision of s 107 (3) … if talak is issued the court should not
make any other inquiry but should grant divorce. Criticism the
court should go back to look at the circumstances of the
parties. Since after all these three procedure the court must go
back to the circumstances of the case and find out whether the
marriage has broken down irreparable.

HALIMA ATHUMANI VS MAULID HAMIS. [1991] TLR 178. ‘The

appellant successfully applied for divorce at Utemini Primary
Court in Singida District, against her husband, the respondent.
She sought divorce on the ground of cruelty on the part of her
husband. The trial Court was satisfied that the husband had
treated his wife with cruelty and granted the application for
divorce. The respondent successfully appealed to the District
Court. The district magistrate reversed the decision of the
Primary Court for two reasons. First, that as the couple was
Islamic, the body that attempted to reconcile them had no
jurisdiction as it was not an Islamic body.

Second, that the Marriage Conciliatory Board did not certify

that it failed to reconcile the parties. The appellant appealed to
the High Court. MWALUSANYA J. Held:
 (i) The mere fact that the Board that reconciled the parties
was not a Moslem Conciliatory Board did not render the
reconciliation a nullity;
(ii) under section 101
(f) of the Law of Marriage Act the court may dispense with
reference to a Marriage Conciliatory Board if it is satisfied that
there are extraordinary circumstances which make reference to
the Board impracticable;
(iii) the appellant had succeeded to prove that the marriage
was broken down beyond repair.In which Mwalusanya J.
likened that of Bibie Maulid., he stated ’for a female Muslim,
she can demand a kului or divorce Mubarak before sheikh. And
for a male Muslim he can issue 3 talak. Then the concern
Muslim merely goes to court to ask divorce to be officially given
without proving that marriage has broken down.

Court, or most of the judges, has misconceived principle

contained principle under section 107 (3) to the Act. After grant
of divorce iddat period should be observed. Just like when the
husband is dead. Section 38 (1) (j) of LMA
 In Mwinyihamisi Kasimu vs. Zainabu Bakari. [1985] TLR 217
The parties were married under Islamic Law and after living
together for over 13 years, the respondent petitioned for
divorce. The Primary Court dismissed the petition and her
appeal to the District Court was also dismissed. But the District
Court magistrate advised that because theirs was an Islamic
marriage, the respondent could still obtain divorce by
redeeming herself (kujikhului) by returning the dowry which
the appellant had paid and that this would be in accord with
s.107(3)(c) of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971. Subsequently
the respondent applied to the court to redeem herself as
advised, and her application was allowed ex-parte. The
husband brought this appeal to the High Court.
Held: (i) In order for the court to make a finding that a
marriage is irreparably broken down and to grant a decree of
divorce as per s.107(3) of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971, it
must be proved firstly, that the parties were married under
Islamic Law, secondly, that a Marriage Conciliation Board has
certified its failure to reconcile the parties and, thirdly, that
subsequent to the Board's failure to reconcile them one of the
E parties has done an act which, under Islamic Law, is sufficient
to terminate the marriage;
(ii) in order for s.107(3) of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971, to
come into play, all the three things must be proved to the
satisfaction of the court hearing the petition for divorce, and
they must be proved before judgment is entered, not after;

(iii) while it was established to the satisfaction of the court

before judgment was entered that the parties were married
according to Islamic Law and that the Conciliation Board had
failed to reconcile them, the third requirement, that any one of
them had done an act sufficient to terminate the marriage
under Islamic Law, was not so established;

(iv) even if the act of the respondent redeeming herself by

returning the dowry could constitute an act to terminate
marriage under Islamic Law, that act was legally ineffectual in
this case because it was done after the court had pronounced
judgment;

(v) as s.140 of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971, does not

empower any court to compel a wife to live with her husband
or a husband with his wife, an application for an order to
compel the respondent to return to the appellant cannot be
entertained;
ADJUSTMENT AFTER DIVORCE

There are two aspects the division of matrimonial property and

the custody of children.

1. Division of matrimonial property; this is provided for

provided for under sS.114 of LMA [matter of controversy in
several years. Contained under section 114 (1) of LMA.] This
provides that court shall have power to order division of
matrimonial property gained under joint efforts. The term joins
effort. I.e. most contravention aspect is whether the domestic
services of husband or wife amounted to joint efforts towards
acquisition of matrimonial properties. Liberal position, argued
that domestic services shall be regarded as jointly effort
towards the acquisition of matrimonial property. But the
conservative opposes. Two Positions continued for 10 years in
courts of Tanzania depended on the minds of presiding judge
whether he is conservative or liberal. HAMID AMIR VS
MAIMUNA AMIR [1977] LRT 55 for 10 years there was no case
refers to the court of appeal. Thus contradiction continued to
exist till 1983 in the case of Bi hawa Mohamed vs. Ali Seif
[1983] TLR 32 an appeal from high court to court of appeal.
Nyalali C J. as he then was said.’ since the welfare of the family
is crucial component for economic activities it is property to
consider contribution. Thus contribution to matrimonial
division should be looked at. It is a step forward since it is
binding thus domestic service of husband or wife shall be taken
a joint work to matrimonial property.the position was settled
since the high court is the superior court and the decision binds
the subordinate thereof.Lukerial Kundugu vs. Samwe Kundugu
[1985] TLR 7.

Robert Aranjo vs. Zena Mwinjuma [1986] TLR 207. ‘The

appellant had petitioned for divorce on the ground of his wife's
desertion. The Primary Court granted the decree on the
grounds of the respondent's desertion and her persistent
denial of sexual intercourse to the appellant. The Court further
ordered a division of the matrimonial assets and awarded a
quarter thereof to the respondent wife. The appellant
challenged the award to the wife on the ground that she was
the cause of the breakdown of the marriage. Held:
Consideration of the conduct of the party who causes the
breakdown of the marriage is relevant only in relation to the
acquisition of the matrimonial assets not in relation to the
breakdown of the marriage.
Omari Chikamba vs. Fatuma Mazunga [1989] TLR 39. ‘The
appellant and the respondent were husband and wife who
were married according to Islamic Law. During the subsistence
of their marriage the appellant and the respondent had
acquired four houses, a coconut farm and a stock of animals.
Matrimonial problems developed and the marriage was
dissolved by an Urban Primary Court. The respondent was
proved to have been living an adulterous life. Trial Court found
that the properties were jointly acquired through their joint
efforts and awarded two houses to the appellant and two
houses to the respondent. The farm and stock were awarded to
the appellant while the respondent was awarded Tshs.10,000/=
as her share of the farm and animals. Respondent appealed to
the District Court which, inter alia, found that one of the houses
was given as a gift to the respondent's mother and should not
have been a subject of division.

KAZIMOTO J.The appellant appealed to the High Court arguing,

inter alia, respondent's alleged misconduct and
mismanagement of property to be crucial in distribution of
matrimonial property.
Held:
(i) Where during the subsistence of a marriage either spouse or
both spouses give matrimonial property to another as a gift,it
is presumed that such property has been permanently given to
that other person unless there is evidence to the contrary;
(ii) the house given to the respondent's mother was not a
matrimonial property and should not have been subjected to
these proceedings. The District Court was right to exclude it
from the list of matrimonial property;
(iii) although evidence in this case shows that respondent was
of loose and immoral character both Islamic law and section
ll4(2)(a) of the Law of Marriage Act, l97l provide that a
divorced woman is entitled to, and does not forfeit her share, in
the division of matrimonial property because of immoral or
loose character;

NOTE; Division of matrimonial property is not fifty fifty.

[PARIPASU] The consideration is put on the welfare of children.

2. Custody of children; in granting or deciding in whose

custody should the child be placed, the court shall consider the
welfare of the child, called theprinciple of welfare of the child.
Section 125 (1) of LMA is to the effect that the custody of child
shall be placed in her or his mother or father. The court shall
consider the parents. in some Exceptional circumstances the
relative may be considered. Section 125 (2) of LMA provides
that the court shall take into account the welfare of a child and
wish of parent or wish of a child if is capable to express his or
her independent opinion and custom and tradition of parties.
Welfare of child principle is not confined to only food shelter
and cloth it include the aspect of culture of the parties, and
more important is the education of child.

Steven Christopher‘s case [1975] LRT 24. In which the father of

a child who was a boy was a British man. He wanted to leave
and go back to England thus intended to take his child. The
mother a British had no an intention of going back to England,
Mfalila j. held because the boy was an English child should go
with his father to be taken care of under English culture. Also
the age of a child should be considered Section 125 (3) of the
Act provides that it is a rebuttable presumption that a child
below age of 7 yrs. should be kept in custody of his mother. But
there may be some circumstance may cause the principle to be
disregarded. For instance when the court proves that the
mother of the child is irresponsible may be she is a prostitute.
Section 126 to 127 of LMA.

Magret Wilson vs. Wilfred Seleman [1976] LRT 48. In which the
court had to consider the custody of four children. The primary
court placed the custody of two elder children to their father
and the youngest to their father but the mother refused the
father to stay with some children Mwakasendo held the two
children should continue to stay with thief father placing them
in their mother won’t benefit them. Since the father was a
teacher by profession. Staying with mother will distort them
educationally.

Restina Kibutu vs. Mbaya Kajiba [1985] TLR 42 ‘Marriage

between the appellant and the respondent was declared null
and void because the respondent was incompetent to marry
under the provisions of section 38 (c) and (e) of the Law of
Marriage Act, 1971. When the marriage was annulled the
appellant was five months pregnant. She then gave birth to a
baby girl. When the E child was two years old the respondent
instituted proceedings for the custody of the child. The Primary
Court awarded him custody of the child. On appeal by the
appellant to the District Court the decision of the Primary Court
was overruled. Custody was given to the appellant until the
child reached the age of seven years. The court ordered the
respondent to pay Shs.50/= a month towards the maintenance
of the child.
When the child reached the age of seven years the
respondent sought to be given custody of the child. The case
was before a Primary Court which heard both the parties and
also heard the child who expressed that she wished to live
with the appellant. Custody of the child was given to the
respondent. The appellant's appeal to the District Court was
not entertained. She appealed to the High Court challenging
the award of custody of the child to the respondent. She also
attacked the maintenance award as being too low.

Held:
(i) The mother's entitlement to custody of a child born out
of a void marriage is not absolute; it is conditional upon the
absence of agreement between the parties or court order
vesting custody to another person;
(ii) the wishes of a child of tender age should not be
permitted to subvert the whole law of the family or I to prevail
against the desire and KAZIMOTO J Authority of a parent unless
the welfare of the child cannot otherwise be secured;
a. under the circumstances of this case it was not in the best
interest of the child to have given custody to the respondent
which would have adversely affected her educationally and
psychologically; in deciding what amount of maintenance
should be paid the court should hold an enquiry as to the
means of both parents in order to arrive at a just decision;
where applicable the court should take into account the
customs of the parties and the conditions prevailing at any
particular time.

MariamTumbo vs. Harold Tumbo. [case contain three grounds

of divorce]Contain three grounds for divorce.

Halima Kahama vs. Jayantlal Karia. [1987] TLR 147. At trial the
appellant admitted in writing her inability to take care of the
child. The trial court unanimously granted custody to the
father. Appellant's appeal to the District Court was rejected.
She is appealing to the High Court arguing that there are
material changes in her circumstances, to enable her to
maintain the child.
Held:
(i) The welfare of the child requires that it be in the hands of
either parent not child's grandparents;
(ii) Where there are material changes in the circumstances of
the parties after a custody order has been made, the aggrieved
party has to apply to the same original court so that it varies
its earlier order; Obiter: Under s.125 (3) of Law of Marriage Act,
1971, there is a rebuttable presumption that it is for the good
of an infant to be with the mother. The younger the child, the
harder it is to rebut that presumption. ‘

Amina Bakari vs. Ramadhani Rajabu. [1984] TLR 41.’ This was a
suit for the custody of a child who was born after his parents
were formally divorced. The appellant claimed that the child
was sired by a person other than her former husband. The trial
court refused to grant the respondent's claim for the reason
that the appellant had named another person as the father of
the child. On appeal the District Court reversed the decision
and hence the present appeal. Held: Whatever be the correct
English expression of "children born in wedlock belong to the
father", it provides no justification for denying the spirit of the
customary rule from which Rule 175 derives, namely, the
preservation of the sanctity and dignity of the marriage
institution by refusing to recognize adultery, a trespass to the
marriage, as taking precedence over and ousting the husband's
rights.

Order accordingly.
Cases referred to:
1. Richard Mapesa v Rashid Bwana [1978] LRT n.4.
2. Mungasio Munchari v Moseti Meremo [1978] LRT n.6.
3. Masuka v Sigonjwe [1971] H.C.D. n. 92.
4. Mgowa Madolo v Mgogolo Dododo [1973] LRT n.7.

HOKA MBOFU v PASTORY MWIJAGE 1983 TLR 286 (HC)

Court High Court of Tanzania - Mwanza

Judge Mushi J

November 30, 1983

CIVIL APPEAL 94 OF 1983 D
[zFNz]Flynote
Family Law - Concubinage - Concubinage for 16 years - Whether
s. 160 of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971 applicable where there
is no allegation of presumption of marriage.
Customary Law - Concubinage - Division of property upon
termination of concubinage - E Rule 93 and 94 of the
Customary Law (Declaration) Order G.N. No. 279 of 1963.
[zHNz]Headnote
The appellant was appealing against the decision of the District
Court of Magu which reversed the Nyaluhande Primary Court
decision which awarded the appellant Shs. F 5,900/= being her
share of property acquired during her concubinage for 16 years
with the Respondent. The District court purported to reverse
the decision of the Primary Court on account that there could
be no division of property between the parties if their
presumed marriage had not been dissolved. The parties had
not alleged presumption of marriage, hence this appeal. G
Held: (i) Where there is no allegation of presumption of
marriage, section 160 of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971 cannot
be invoked merely on account of concubinage association;
(ii) rule 93 of the Customary Law (Declaration) Order, G.N.
No. 279/1963 is applicable in the division of property acquired
during concubinage association. H
[zCIz]Case Information
Order accordingly. I
No case referred to.
1983 TLR p287
MUSHI J
[zJDz]Judgment
Mushi, J.: The appellant, Hoka Mbofu, filed a suit in the Primary
Court claiming half of A property earned or acquired during
the period of 16 years in which she lived with the respondent.
The Primary Court awarded the appellant Shs. 5,900/= as her
share. The respondent, Pastory Mwijage, appealed to the
District Court. The learned Appeal Magistrate scrutinized the
evidence and found that since the parties lived together in B
concubinage for 16 years, the provision of section 160 of
Marriage Act No. 1971 applied and that on the application of
that provision the parties were presumed husband and wife.
The learned magistrate went to conclude that as there had
been no divorce, the Primary Court could not divide the
property acquired during that period. The court C quashed
the proceedings and declared that the parties were husband
and wife and it was upon an aggrieved party to file a suit for
separation or divorce. The appellant was dissatisfied with that
decision and she has appealed to this court.
Before this court, the appellant stated that she did not agree
with the court's decision that D she was a wife of the
respondent since she was never married to him and thus she
cannot file any divorce. The respondent agreed that they did
not perform any ceremony of marriage although they lived
together for 16 years or so.
It is an accepted fact that the parties in this case were not
married by any known law of E Tanzania. There was no
customary, Civil or religious marriage. The parties only lived in
concubinage. If the association is to be given the status of
constituting marriage this can only be done by invoking section
160 (1) of the Law of Marriage Act No. 5 of the 1971 which
reads: F
"Where it is proved that a man and a woman have lived
together for two years or upwards, in such circumstances as to
have acquired the reputation of being husband and wife, there
shall be a rebuttable resumption that they were fully married".
G
Since there were allegations that the parties had lived together
for about 16 years, the learned appeal magistrate felt that the
case was fully covered by section 160(1) of the Marriage Act
quoted above. But was it necessary to invoke the Marriage Act
provisions? I am of the settled view that it was not necessary to
apply the above H provision. Right from the institution of the
claim, the appellant has not asserted that she was ever married
by the respondent. She has maintained that her association
with the respondent was purely that of concubinage. But she
says that during the concubinage association, she and the
respondent acquired some property/money, and that since I
respondent has decided to terminate that
1983 TLR p288
MUSHI J
association, the appellant has no objection except that she
should get what they acquired A together. In her evidence in
the original court and her statement before this court, she has
not based her claim on her association having acquired the
status of a wife. Similarly the respondent's evidence in the
Primary Court did not assert that the appellant was his wife.
The respondent merely stated how it came about that the
appellant came B to stay with him. In fact from careful
scrutiny of the respondent's statement, it would appear that
although the parties were living under one roof, they were each
leading an independent life. For example the appellant lived
with the children of her brother against the respondent's wish
and also according to the respondent the appellant had a
different C plot which she cultivated separately with the help
of the children of her brother. In this regard, even if section
160(1) of the Act was to be invoked, it would have been
necessary to look more into the lives of the parties rather than
the mere fact that they lived under one roof. The respondent
has not claimed that the appellant is his wife, in D which case
the appellant's claim could not be entertained unless there was
divorce or separation. The whole claim has been made outside
the Marriage Act and without requiring its assistance in order
to be legally blessed. The claim is maintainable under
customary law because there is no mention of section 160(1) of
the Marriage Act in the E whole trial. Rule 93 and 94 of Local
Customary Law (Declaration) order of Government Notice
Number 279 of 1963 are applicable in this case. Rule 93
authorises the property acquired during concubinage
association to be divided between the parties if they decide to
part company and section 94 sets out the manner in which the
property shall be divided. F
For the above reasons, this appeal is allowed. The district court
decision is set aside and the Primary Court decision is restored.
As regards the amount awarded, there seems to be sufficient
evidence to support the claim and the amount is reasonable
and the same remains undisturbed. G
Each party to bear her/his costs in this court.
This judgment to be certified to the original court for reading to
the parties.cx
[1] 1971
[2] Section 30 (2)of Law Of Marriage Act
[3] [1983] TLR
[4] Supra.
[5] Gluckman 1969, 60
[6] Gluckman, 1969, 60
[7] www.google.com 08.05.2007, “Marriage-Payment and
dowry”
[8] www.google.com 9-05-2007, “marriage Payment”
[9] Gluckman, 1969, 60
[10] www.google.com 9-05-2007, “marriage payment”
[11] Whalton’s Law Lexicon 14th Edition
[12] Pope Paul VI. Encyclical Letter, July 25, 1968, 5
[13] Concise Law Dictionary 3rd Ed. 2006
[14] Osborn’s Concise Law Dictionary 8th Edition
[15] All England Annual Review 2005, 258/9
[16] Sex and Morality: A report presented to the British Council
of Churches,11
[17] ‘‘The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights,
and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not rule
over her body, bur the husband does; likewise the husband
does not rule over his body, but the wife does’’
[18] ‘‘Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement
for a season…;but then come together again…’’
Mr. Justice Malisa Anthony Tumaini University-Makumira
University College
Tags :Family Law
SHARE THIS
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
THE LAW OF MARRIAGE ACT, TANZANIA
Marriage, Divorce, Polygamy & Wife Obedience in Tanzania
family law notes in tanzania
Next
Marriage, Divorce, Polygamy & Wife Obedience in Tanzania
Previous
Law of marriage Case Laws in Tanzania
LEAVE A COMMENTBLOGGER
35 Comments:
UnknownApril 14, 2020 at 3:45 AM
Thanx nice notes, I learn something

Reply

John kerryAugust 12, 2020 at 9:54 AM

It could help me make the most of my nourishment and time
alone. Eating carefully may help me know about sound
nourishment and acknowledging sustenance. internet in
naranjito

Reply

UnknownAugust 21, 2020 at 12:31 AM

Downloading this notes

Reply
UnknownSeptember 7, 2020 at 2:59 PM
Thanks to Dr. IBUDU for saving my marriage and making my
firend to get pregnant! My names are Reina William, I have
been married to my Husband for 7 years, we have 2 kids
together and our marriage was wonderful. Am very happy to
tell everyone my testimony Am sherry from united states, am a
nurse, this is a story of my love life. Another woman had to take
my lover away from me and my husband left me and the kids
and we have suffered for 2years until i met a post where this
man called Dr. IBUDU have helped many people and i decided
to give him a reply on his Email: [email protected] if he
can help me bring my lover back home and he ask me some
information which i send to him and that of my husband and
after 48hours as he have told me, i saw a car drove into the
house and behold it was my husband and he have come to me
and the kids crying and begging for forgiveness and that is why i
am happy today. He also set my friend free from HIV Dr. IBUDU
really make the woman i am today for any one looking for how
to get his or her ex back or any problem you are having i advice
you Dr. IBUDU is the solution to all problem .You can contact
him with this email address: [email protected] you can
call him or Whatsapp him on: +2348078467513

Reply
Bloger SohanSeptember 18, 2020 at 10:33 AM
To my knowledge you are a very good lawyer. That's why I want
a solution from you.
My grandfather wrote me a piece of land but I did not reject
the land.
About fifteen years later, my cousins want to share in that land.
What should I do now? I hope you will try to solve my
problem.You may like this post on
Real Estate Lawyer Edmonton

Reply

Gilad BermanOctober 7, 2020 at 9:39 AM

Thanks for sharing article with us. Amazing !!

pennsylvania lawyer
employment lawyer
Reply

Anusha TodurkarOctober 31, 2020 at 1:01 AM

A big thanks to Dr Oselumen i never believe that there still exist
a real death spell caster after all this years of disappointment
from the enormous spammers on the Internet who go about
scamming people, until i was opportune to meet Dr Oselumen a
real spell caster, through a close friend called Jennifer who Dr
oselumen had helped before, when i contacted him with his
email via [email protected] i explain how my ex have
been giving me problem in my marriage, she never allowed me
a moment of peace, and i need to end it by killing her, and i
don't want to make use of assassin because it will be risky so i
needed to do it in a spiritual way that's why i decided to
contact him, he assured me not to worry as i have contacted
the right person at the right time, i co-operated with him and in
less than a week my ex was dead, she slept and never woke up
all thanks to Dr Oselumen indeed he's really a humble man. you
can contact dr oselumen for any death spell, such as to kill your
superior in the office and take his or her place, death spell to
kill your father and inherit his wealth ,death spell to kill anyone
who have scammed you in the past ,spell for increase in
salaries, spell for promotion at the office, spell to get your ex
lover back, if things is not working well in your life then you
need to contact him now via Email [email protected] call
or add him on whatsapp +2348054265852.

Reply

Lead india law associatesNovember 3, 2020 at 3:57 AM

Thelila Provide Documents Required for Court Marriage Under
Special Marriage Act-1954. Best Court marriage lawyer in Delhi,
Top Lawyers in Delhi, Top Advocates in Delhi, Court marriage in
Delhi, Best Court marriage in Ghaziabad, Best Court marriage
procedure in Delhi. With Lead India law associates. For more
information.

Reply

MaxNovember 6, 2020 at 11:11 AM

I really thank you for the valuable info on this great subject and
look forward to more great posts. Thanks a lot for enjoying this
beauty article with me. I am appreciating it very much! Looking
forward to another great article. Good luck to the author! All
the best! ciudadania

Reply

Lead india law associatesNovember 11, 2020 at 2:48 AM

Thelila provide service for Best Court marriage in Ghaziabad,
Court marriage in Delhi certificate the legality of marriage and
we also provide the court marriage lawyer in Delhi, Top
Advocates in Delhi, Easy process court marriage, Best Court
marriage in same day. With Lead India law associates. For more
information.

Reply

haaliDecember 3, 2020 at 3:01 AM

I propose merely very good along with reputable data,
consequently visualize it: Paul Mankin

Reply
AlexanderJune 10, 2021 at 6:53 AM
Hiring an expert in the field of family law will give you an
advantage and save much time and effort during a high turmoil
time in your life. family law attorneys

Reply

Marck AndrewJuly 2, 2021 at 5:09 AM

I found Hubwit as a transparent s ite, a social hub which is a
conglomerate of Buyers and Sellers who are ready to offer
online digital consultancy at decent cost. International Family
Lawyer

Reply

Computer, shortcut key GyanJuly 26, 2021 at 1:44 PM

Best Service at chip price do you want a good advocate inside
delhi then i can help you in that if you want to get married or
register your marriage please contact us
Same Day Court Marriage in Delhi
Tatkal Court Marriage in Delhi
Arya Samaj Marriage in delhi
Court Marriage Certificate procedure
Same Day Court Marriage in Ghaziabad

Reply

vezoneseoAugust 28, 2021 at 8:14 AM

I will really appreciate the writer's choice for choosing this
excellent article appropriate to my matter.Here is deep
description about the article matter which helped me
more.family law solicitors near me

Reply

Sarah JordanOctober 18, 2021 at 1:58 AM

I was searching for family lawyers. Thanks, admin, for sharing
such wonderful content on this topic. Now I have got
everything I need about it. Here’s another informative content
Family Lawyer of Edmonton , you may find here more
information.

Reply

UnknownNovember 15, 2021 at 3:31 AM

more helpfully

Reply

Lead india law associatesNovember 19, 2021 at 4:18 AM

Same Day Court Marriage involves the marriage of partners as
per their rituals & marriage will be registered at court. Hindu
couples can marry in the Arya Samaj Mandir & Marriage
registration at court.
Reply

Maud van ReeNovember 28, 2021 at 9:12 PM

I contacted lord Bubuza when all hope was lost, when no one
could help me stop my cheating boyfriend from cheating, He
left me for another girl because of this. I love him and didn't
want him out of my life so i cried to my friend. she told me how
lord Bubuza reunited her and boyfriend with his spell. I
immediately contacted Lord Bubuza for help via WhatsApp: +1
505 569 0396. He responded and told me not to worry that my
boyfriend will come back begging. I did as lord Bubuza
instructed and he casted the spell. 14 hours after the spell was
casted, I was so surprised when my boyfriend came begging me
on his knees. This man save my relationship and we are happily
married now. Contact lord Bubuza for help via WhatsApp: +1
505 569 0396 or email: lordbubuzamiraclework @ hotmail .
com

Reply

Sarah JordanDecember 14, 2021 at 11:07 PM

It’s a great and useful piece of info. I’m happy that you just
shared this useful info with us. Please stay informed like this.
Thank you for sharing. Here’s another informative content on
Family Lawyer Edmonton , may find more details here.

Reply

maxDecember 20, 2021 at 10:34 AM

Looking back at the time you were together, it can be hard to

be objective about what actually went on, who was at fault,
etc.
Marriage Separation Platform

Reply

Ricky DariusDecember 22, 2021 at 3:14 AM

Divorce is an emotional decision some tips will surely help them
to save time and money. If you want both of these then you will
need an experienced lawyer like family lawyer in saskatoon.
Reply

Maxlaw SolicitorsJanuary 21, 2022 at 1:27 AM

Immigration law is a fast changing and constantly an evolving
area of law, therefore in applying for family visa, work visa or
skilled work visa etc, our Immigration lawyers at Maxlaw
Solicitors in London, UK, can provide you with assistance and
advice on all aspects of straight forward and complex cases.
Contact one of our lawyers in our firm if you want to apply for
further leave to remain, for permanent stay or to regularise
your stay in the United Kingdom.

We also advise those who live overseas and would like to

migrate to UK on a temporary or on permanent basis.
Pakistani Lawyer in UK
Pakistani Lawyer in London

Reply

Sarah JordanJanuary 22, 2022 at 9:09 PM

‫‪Awesome article, it was exceptionally helpful! I simply began in‬‬
‫‪this and I'm becoming more acquainted with it better! Cheers,‬‬
‫‪keep doing awesome! Legal Separation.‬‬

‫‪Reply‬‬

‫‪fariya.NoMarch 10, 2022 at 10:55 AM‬‬

‫افضل محامي أحوال شخصية جدة يبحث عنه الكثير يحتاجون مختص في قضايا‬
‫األحوال الشخصية واألسرية في جدة‪ .‬افضل محامي أحوال شخصية جدة‬

‫‪Reply‬‬

‫‪mohamad lawMarch 12, 2022 at 12:38 PM‬‬

‫من هو افضل محامي في الرياض بالمملكة العربية السعودية ؟‬
‫محامي في الرياض ‪ ،‬هو مكتب افضل محامي في الرياض وسائر مناطق ومدن‬
‫المملكة العربية السعودية‪،‬يضم المكتب العربي للقانون طاقم متخصص من افضل‬
‫المحامين في الرياض‬
‫محامي بالرياض من هو افضل محامي في الرياض وما هو رقمه ؟ السؤال الذي‬
‫‪ .‬يطرحه الكثير منا على بعضنا البعض عند التعامل مع المشكالت القانونية‬
 ‫حقًا أين أجد افضل محامي بالرياض مناسب لجميع القضايا القانونية بما في ذلك‬
‫القضايا التجارية والطالق واالحوال الشخصية ونقل الملكيات والشيكات والمحاكم‬
‫العمالية ؟‬
‫اذا كنت تبحث أيضًا عن افضل محامي في جدة فيسعدنا إخبارك باننا نضم افضل‬
‫‪.‬محامي بجدة خبرة وعلمًا على مستوى المملكة العربية السعودية‬

‫‪Reply‬‬

‫‪mohamad lawMarch 12, 2022 at 2:31 PM‬‬

‫إذا تم اتهامك في قضية جنائية ‪ ،‬فعادة ما يحق لك الحصول على محامي جنائي أو‬
‫محامي في جدة خبير في القضايا الجنائية‪ .‬عالوة على ذلك ‪ ،‬إذا كنت ضحية فعل‬
‫إجرامي ‪ ،‬فقد يحق لك أيًض ا االستعانة بمحاٍم للمساعدة القانونية‪ .‬من الممكن أيًضا‬
‫االستعانة بخبر محامين في جدة للمساعدة في االستشارة الشخصية ‪ . ،‬بالنسبة‬
‫للشركات سيكون من الطبيعي الوصول إلى عالقة قانونية دائمة ومستقرة ‪ ،‬أو حتى‬
‫‪.‬الحصول على محامي في جدة بشكل دائم‬
‫‪................‬‬
‫افضل محامي في جدة مكة الطائف بالمملكة العربية السعودية يقدم استشارات قانونية‬
‫سعودية في مختلف تخصصات االنظمة خبرة في صياغة العقود واللوائح‬
‫‪.‬االعتراضية‬
‫‪………………………………........................‬‬
 ‫ هو مكتب افضل محامي في جدة والرياض وسائر مناطق‬، ‫استشارة محامي جدة‬
‫يضم طاقم متخصص من المحامين في جدة‬،‫ومدن المملكة العربية السعودية‬
‫ والسعودية‬.

Reply

Best Arya Samaj Marriage in DelhiJuly 12, 2022 at 8:08 AM

Court Marriage in Delhi
Nice Article! Thanks for sharing this information.
https://www.court-marriages.in/p/court-marriage-in-delhi.html

Reply

divyanshitripathiJuly 19, 2022 at 4:06 AM

Nice Article! Thanks for sharing this information.
https://courtmarriagegov.com/court-marriage-in-delhi/

Reply
Michael McNealAugust 29, 2022 at 9:42 PM
I read this information on your weblog and thought it was
extremely helpful. I'll make sure to take notes on everything! I
appreciate you sharing this advice with us. Edmonton lawyer
manslaughter.

Reply

ShivamSeptember 20, 2022 at 9:19 AM

Find the best Fixed mortgage rate in Kenora that work
perfectly for you. We make it easy to compare rates in Kenora
big banks and top brokers for free. Best mortgage rate in
Kenora

Reply

ShivamSeptember 20, 2022 at 12:15 PM

Finding Car Accident Lawyer in Canada? So VSR Law can assist
you in recovering damages and ensure that your Motor Vehicle
Accident claim is as strong as possible. Car Accident Lawyer in
Cambridge
Reply

RoundtableNewsOctober 13, 2022 at 3:00 AM

It is a Helpful sharing me...I am very much blessed with the
contents you have mentioned. This could not be possible
without any Legal detailed …..Read More

Reply

Scot M. LopezDecember 20, 2022 at 9:35 PM

You should always engage a divorce lawyer, preferably one
with extensive knowledge in family law as like as divorce
lawyers Regina. Make sure your lawyer has experience handling
family law cases.

Reply

Sophia CharlieDecember 31, 2022 at 3:17 AM

Interesting post. I Have Been wondering about this issue, so
thanks for posting. Pretty cool post.It 's really very nice and
Useful post.Thanks. Family Law mediators Sydney

Reply

CATEGORIES
ActAdministrative LawCasesCivil ProcedureConstitutionCriminal
LawCriminal ProcedureCriminology &
PenologyDocumentsFamily LawFeatureHuman RightsInsurance
LawLaw Of ContractLaw Of EvidenceLaw Of The ChildLaw Of
TortsLegal MethodsLegislationMoot CourtTort Law
CONTACT FORM
Name
Email *
Message *
Created By SoraTemplates & MyBloggerThemes