Family Law Notes in Tanzania - Mkundi Legal Service

9/29/2020 family law notes in tanzania - Mkundi Legal service
amily law notes in tanzania

by Eddo 2 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
https://mkundilegalservice.blogspot.com/2019/03/family-law-notes-in-tanzania.html 1/32
- 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 Share it Tweet Share it Share it Pin it
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
THE LAW OF MARRIAGE ACT, Marriage, Divorce, Polygamy & family law notes in tanzania
TANZANIA Wife Obedience in Tanzania
Previous Next
Law of marriage Case Laws in Tanzania Marriage, Divorce, Polygamy & Wife Obedience in
Tanzania
LEAVE A COMMENT BL O G G E R
8 Comments:
Unknown April 14, 2020 at 3:45 AM
Thanx nice notes, I learn something
Reply
Dr. Okuns Spell Caster June 3, 2020 at 2:00 PM
My ex is back. Do you need your ex love back? contact DR. OKUNS on his email: (herbal.home247@yahoo.com) he help me bring my ex husband
back and i believe he will also help you.
I am Cielo Lari by name, I have been rejected by my husband after three (3) years of marriage just because another woman had a spell on him and he
left me and the kid to suffer. one day when i was reading through the web online, i saw a post on how this spell caster on this address
herbal.home247@yahoo.com have help a woman to get back her husband and i gave him a reply to his address and he told me that a woman had a
spell on my husband and he told me that he will help me and after 2 days that i will have my husband back. i believed him and today i am glad to let
you all know that My Husband Is Back With Full Love, this spell caster have the power to bring lovers back. because i am now happy with my
husband. Thanks to DR. OKUNS. His email: herbal.home247@yahoo.com And his Phone number: +2348078467513 You can also visit his website at:
( www.herbalhome247.wixsite.com/mysite )
Reply
Gilad Berman July 2, 2020 at 8:07 AM
Nice, Thank you for sharing useful information to get benefit out of it.
nicely law group

thomas m. nicely
Reply
Unknown July 9, 2020 at 7:46 AM
Hey! I am getting bored, please fchat with me ;) ;) ;) …

████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
Reply
John kerry August 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
Unknown August 21, 2020 at 12:31 AM
Downloading this notes

Reply
Unknown September 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:
tinalovespell@yahoo.com 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: tinalovespell@yahoo.com you can call him or Whatsapp him on: +2348078467513
Reply
Bloger Sohan September 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

Family Law Notes in Tanzania - Mkundi Legal Service

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Family Law Notes in Tanzania - Mkundi Legal Service

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

9/29/2020 family law notes in tanzania - Mkundi Legal service

amily law notes in tanzania

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

Therefore, there could be no temporary marriage. Monogamous marriage is the

Qn. Hyde vs. Hyde P&D 133

Polygomamous marriage is a union which a husband my have more than one

The right to found a family among the fundamental human right.

Marriage during pre independence people.

Customary type of marriage. Obbi defined customary marriage as union

Characteristics of a customary marriage.

1. Protection of children and extension of kinship.

PRE CAPITALIST AFRICAN MARRIAGES

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

RATIONALE FOR BRIDE PRICE;

- this was paid to legitimate child

Case; Amina Rashid vs. Ramadhani

CEREMONY OF MARRIAGE UNDER PRE- CAPITALIST

TYPES OF CUSTOMARY AFRICAN MARRIAGES

- enable the man to have more labor power

4. Serorate. This kind of marriage were another woman is provided by the

“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

MATRILINIAL SOCIETY as opposed to patrilianeal society are the ones in

STATE INTERVATION IN FAMILY LAW DURING THE COLONIAL PERIOD

THE TREND OF COLONIAL JUDGES ON AFRICAN MARRIAGE

POSITION OF COLONIAL JUDGE ON ISLAMIC MARRIAGES

In Tanganyika was a problem of Asiatic marriages especial for those non

THE EFFECTS OF UNIFICATION OF [CUSTOMARY] LAW AND FAMILY

A marriage is usual provided with a contract to marry or promise to marry due to

[Notes yet to be written]

THE NATURE OF MARRIAGE IN TANZANIA

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

The forms of ceremonies

RELIGIOUS MARRIAGES; [Christian and Islamic]

1. CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE; [RC. PROTESTANTS, PENTECOSTALS] For

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

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

separate. The presumption is based on his cohabitation for two years or

HOW DIFFERENT JUDGES INTERPRETES THE SECTION 160 OF L.M.A

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

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

DUTIES AND RIGHT UNDER MARIAGE

CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THAT RIGHT TO EXIST

ADULTERY AND RIGHT TO COMPENSATION

1. Damages should not be punitive but compensatory.

Section 72 up to 75 of LMA different tribes with different character customs and

1. We should not impose English culture in Tanzania which have mixed

Divorce is where a valid subsisting marriage while decree of annulment is

Two circumstances in which a marriage annulity may be done.

1. where a marriage is void

Dereneville vs. Dereneville [1948] ALR 56

GROUNDS UPON WHICH A MARRIAGE IS DECLARED VOID

GROUNDS UPON WHICH MARRIAGE CAN BE HELD VOIDABLE.

1. Either parties to the marriage are incapable of consummating the

the purpose of consummation, sexual intercourse should be complete and