Ad Code

Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Adamu Mtondo v. Likuna Omari, (PC) Civ. App. 11-D-68, 10/5/68, Hamlyn J.



Adamu Mtondo v. Likuna Omari, (PC) Civ. App. 11-D-68, 10/5/68, Hamlyn J.

Appellant orally pronounced a divorce from his wife. Somewhat less than a month later, presumably in a period of “tuhr”,  he orally revoked the divorce. The Primary Court held that the divorce was complete and, on appeal, the District court affirmed acting on the advice of an assessor that the revocation was of no effect because the dowry had not been fully paid at that time. Neither court specified the school of Muslim law to which the parties adhered.

            Held; Under the more common interpretations, divorce is effected only by three pronouncements and was not effected here, where only one pronouncement was given. Trial courts should specify the school of Muslim law which is applicable; in the absence of any indication to

The contrary, it should be presumed that the more common interpretation applies. (2) Even if the single pronouncement was effective, the fact that the dowry had not been fully paid did not affect the validity of the revocation and the oral divorce was rescinded. Appeal allowed and respondent declared to be still the lawful wife of appellant. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments