In the case of Sibanda v Sibanda and Another 2002 (1) ZLR 622 (H) SMITH J stated…, as follows:“Since I have found that Josephine was not aware, in March 1994, that Joseph was a married man, that means that their 'marriage' is in fact a putative marriage.”The judge held, in ...
In the case of Sibanda v Sibanda and Another 2002 (1) ZLR 622 (H) SMITH J stated…, as follows:
“Since I have found that Josephine was not aware, in March 1994, that Joseph was a married man, that means that their 'marriage' is in fact a putative marriage.”
The judge held, in that case, that, the plaintiff was only entitled to what was a fair share in the matrimonial estate. She was not entitled to a half share.
The matter went on appeal to the Supreme Court, and, in Sibanda and Another v Sibanda 2005 (1) ZLR 97 (S), the Appeal Court upheld the decision of the High Court. The Supreme Court agreed with the lower court, that, where a man enters into a marriage with another woman whilst a previous monogamous marriage subsisted, the second marriage is a nullity.
The court, however acknowledged, that, it was the correct approach to take into consideration the contribution of the 'wife' in order to determine what amounts to an equitable distribution of matrimonial property.
See also Makovah v Makovah 1998 (2) ZLR 82 (S).
