Cape Town man fails to convince court his lobola payment did not mean marriage - IOL

The Western Cape High Court ruled against a man who disputed the existence of his marriage.

The Western Cape High Court in Cape Town has declared a customary marriage valid after a man disputed that he had married his partner, arguing that payments made to her family were fines rather than lobola.

Judge Constance Noluthando Nziweni ruled that the couple had entered into a valid customary marriage on December 27, 2014, at the woman’s family homestead in Ugie, Eastern Cape.

The judgment, delivered on October 28, 2026, followed a dispute that began after the couple’s relationship broke down and the man sought to distance himself from the marriage.

The woman approached the court in 2019 for an order declaring their customary marriage valid. The matter was subsequently referred for oral evidence to establish whether lobola had been paid, the amounts involved and whether the legal requirements for a customary marriage had been met.

The couple began a romantic relationship in 2010 and later lived together. According to the woman, the man eventually proposed marriage, prompting arrangements for their respective families to meet.

The first meeting took place at her home in Kwa-Langa, Cape Town, in October 2014. She testified that the families discussed the marriage and that the man paid money towards lobola.

The parties later travelled to her family homestead in Ugie, where a further gathering took place on December 27, 2014.

The woman told the court that additional money was paid during the proceedings and that a sheep was slaughtered as part of the customary arrangements. She said her family subsequently handed her over to the man’s family.

She maintained that the customary requirements for their marriage had been fulfilled and that the couple thereafter returned to Cape Town.

The man, however, denied that a customary marriage had taken place.

He argued that the money paid during the family gatherings was intended to settle fines arising from an assault involving the couple, rather than to fulfil lobola obligations.

He also claimed that the woman had misrepresented the purpose of the meetings and that he had been pressured during the proceedings at her family homestead.

The man further disputed the evidence presented by the woman’s witnesses, maintaining that the initial meeting had not resulted in an agreement to marry.

Judge Nziweni found that the evidence supported the woman’s account that lobola had been paid during the family gatherings.

The judge said the precise amount paid was not decisive because customary law did not prescribe a fixed minimum or maximum payment for lobola.

What mattered was whether there had been a genuine agreement to pay lobola and whether the essential requirements for a valid customary marriage had been met.

The court found that the evidence of the man’s witness, Mr Sixwaru, contained material contradictions that undermined his credibility.

The judge also accepted the evidence of Mr Maloni, who had represented the man’s family during the negotiations and later accompanied the parties to Ugie.

Maloni corroborated the woman’s account that money had been paid towards lobola and that the family gatherings formed part of the customary marriage process.

The judge found that the invitation sent to the man’s family in December 2014, following the initial negotiations in Cape Town, demonstrated that the two families were continuing with arrangements for the marriage.

The gathering in Ugie, the participation of relatives from different areas, the slaughtering of a sheep and the sharing of meat were also consistent with the conclusion of a customary union, the court found.

The judge rejected the man’s claim that the events at the homestead were merely intended to settle a fine.

The court also considered an affidavit signed by the man after the family gatherings, in which he acknowledged that he and the woman were living together as husband and wife.

Although he claimed that the woman had persuaded him to sign the document without understanding its purpose, the judge found his explanation unconvincing.

Nziweni said the man had not demonstrated that he misunderstood the contents of the affidavit or that he was incapable of appreciating the significance of his sworn statement.

The judge found that the affidavit supported the woman’s version and was consistent with the events surrounding the lobola negotiations and the gathering at the family homestead.

The court concluded that the man’s attempt to portray the payments and ceremonies as unrelated to a marriage was not supported by the evidence.

A key issue was whether the marriage could be recognised despite the fact that certain rituals associated with the man’s family and clan had not been performed.

Evidence indicated that the woman had not been formally introduced to the man’s family at their own homestead and had not been given a customary bridal name. Further traditional counselling and other clan-specific ceremonies also remained outstanding.

The man’s representative argued that the customary arrangements had not been fully completed on his family’s side.

However, Judge Nziweni distinguished between the statutory requirements for a valid customary marriage and additional cultural practices that may accompany the union.

The judgment explained that section 3(1) of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act requires the parties to be of the required age, to consent to the marriage, and for the marriage to be negotiated and entered into or celebrated in accordance with customary law.

The judge said that not every traditional ritual is a legal prerequisite for a marriage to be recognised.

“Strict adherence to ritual formulae” is not always essential, the judgment noted, emphasising that customary law is dynamic and evolves with the communities that practise it.

The court found that the absence of certain rituals, including the bestowing of a bridal name and traditional counselling known as ukuyala, did not invalidate a marriage where the substantive legal requirements had been fulfilled.

Nziweni said the law could not permit clan-specific practices to override national legislation intended to recognise and protect spouses in customary marriages.

The judge added that allowing a spouse to rely on omitted rituals to deny an otherwise valid marriage would undermine the purpose of the legislation.

After considering the evidence as a whole, the court found that the woman had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the customary marriage had been concluded.

The judge held that the initial negotiations in Kwa-Langa, the subsequent family gathering in Ugie, the payments made towards lobola and the man’s own affidavit established a continuous process culminating in a valid customary marriage.

The court accordingly declared that the couple had entered into a valid customary marriage on December 27, 2014, in Ugie.

The man was also ordered to pay the costs of the application.