Revisiting the "to be or not to be" debate and comments on Netshituka v Netshituka 2011 5 SA 453 (SCA)

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Maithufi, Ignatius Philip
dc.date.accessioned 2017-02-27T06:46:34Z
dc.date.available 2017-02-27T06:46:34Z
dc.date.issued 2015
dc.description.abstract Determining the validity of a customary marriage or a civil marriage which was contracted during the subsistence of another marriage (a civil or customary marriage) has plagued South African courts for a number of years (see Maithufi “To be or not to be: Does this question still arise?“ 2013 TSAR 723). The general principle since Nkabula v Linda 1951 1 SA 377 (A) was that no customary marriage could exist in the face of a civil marriage. The effect was that a civil marriage dissolved a subsisting customary marriage between a husband and a woman other than his wife, by customary rites. It also meant that a customary marriage which was entered into during the subsistence of a civil marriage was null and void ab initio (Bennet Customary law in Southern Africa (2004) 239– 240). en_ZA
dc.description.department Private Law en_ZA
dc.description.librarian am2017 en_ZA
dc.description.uri http://www.lexisnexis.co.za en_ZA
dc.identifier.citation Maithufi, IP 2015, 'Revisiting the "to be or not to be" debate and comments on Netshituka v Netshituka 2011 5 SA 453 (SCA)', Journal of Contemporary Roman Dutch Law / Tydskrif Vir Hedendaagse Romeins-Hollandse Reg, vol. 78, pp. 307-317. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 1682-4490
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/59166
dc.language.iso en en_ZA
dc.publisher LexisNexis en_ZA
dc.rights LexisNexis en_ZA
dc.subject Validity en_ZA
dc.subject Customary marriage en_ZA
dc.subject Civil marriage en_ZA
dc.subject Courts en_ZA
dc.title Revisiting the "to be or not to be" debate and comments on Netshituka v Netshituka 2011 5 SA 453 (SCA) en_ZA
dc.type Article en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record