Halifa v. Hadija (PC) Civ. App. 75-A-69; 2/11/70 Kwikima Ag. J.

 

Halifa v. Hadija  (PC) Civ.  App.  75-A-69; 2/11/70 Kwikima Ag. J.

The appellant filed a claim for the paternity of a child and its custody from the respondent its mother. Evidence adduced in the Primary Court established that there were various customary payments and rites which the respondent permitted the appellant to perform and make.  He gave for example the ceremonial dress customarily given to an expectant fiancée and Shs.150/= to the mother of the respondent for having deflowered her daughter. These payments were made with due publicity. Evidence further showed that the respondent allowed the appellant to care for her during her pregnancy by taking her to hospital for ante-natal care and she lived with him for sometime after the a baby was born before running away to a new lover.  The Primary Court found for the appellant, but the District Court reversed.

Held:   (1) “The respondent cannot now be heard to deny the child’s paternity by the appellant.  It is the law, according to the Customary Law Declaration that once a man is named as the father of a child, the burden is on him to prove that he is not, provided there is evidence that he had sexual intercourse with the mother before the child was born.  In this case the appellant actually paid the respondent’s mother damages for deflowering the respondent. He did this willingly and apparently quite happily as he was going to marry the respondent.  He even took her to his home where she remained until she ceased having love for him.”  (2)  “There was sufficient evidence for the trial court to find as it did that the appellant had established his claim over the disputed child. The purported reversal by the District Magistrate is at variance with the facts established, the customary law so clearly spelt out by the trail       court, and the unanimous opinion of all the assessors in both courts below.  As such the purported reversal, unjustified by the facts and law as it is, cannot be allowed to stand.”  (3)  Appeal allowed.