The High Court has dismissed a woman’s bid to be declared the sole surviving wife of her late husband, ruling that he was survived by three wives.
Justice Amy Tsanga dismissed Pupurai Makoni’s claim, finding that the evidence did not establish that the first marriage had been dissolved under customary law or that the third relationship was not a marriage.
The dispute concerns the estate of Paul Sambadoti, who died on 3 August 2019, leaving six immovable properties in Zimbabwe.
Three women claimed recognition as his wives: Candy Muganho, Pupurai Makoni and Pauline Mushanigwa.
Makoni argued that she was the only surviving wife. She said Muganho’s marriage had ended years earlier and that Mushanigwa had been introduced to her as a business partner, not a spouse.
She testified that she had lived with Sambadoti in Botswana, assisted with business invoicing, contributed to property acquisitions and nursed him during a prolonged illness, and that neither of the other women had visited him during that period.
In relation to Muganho, Makoni relied on an alleged confrontation in Botswana around 2008. She said Muganho had travelled there to collect belongings and seek maintenance for her children, and that during an altercation Sambadoti gave her 100 pula as “gupuro”, a customary divorce token, and declared she was no longer his wife.
Muganho denied that any divorce had taken place and said she had reconciled with Sambadoti despite marital difficulties and continued to regard herself as his wife.
Justice Tsanga found the alleged divorce unproven. She noted that Makoni’s own witness, Luckson Machiwa, the deceased’s nephew, acknowledged that a customary divorce ordinarily involves a middleman and the wife’s relatives, but there was no satisfactory evidence that Muganho’s family had participated in or accepted the alleged divorce.
“A shouting match in Botswana where Paul Sambadoti is alleged by Pupurai to have flung a 100 pula note at his wife in front of her friend, hardly constitutes the proper notification to the wife’s family that a marriage has ended,” the judge said.
The court also found that Muganho’s absence from Botswana or her relationship with another man was insufficient to establish dissolution.
“The evidence of separation is, therefore, considerably stronger than the evidence of completed dissolution,” Justice Tsanga observed.
On Mushanigwa, the court heard that lobola had been paid. Mushanigwa testified to that effect and her mother, Grace Mushanigwa, confirmed receiving customary groceries from Sambadoti as her son-in-law. The deceased’s relatives attended the ceremony, although Sambadoti himself was not present.
Justice Tsanga accepted that there was a substantial factual basis for recognising her as a wife, noting that customary marriage arrangements can be conducted through representatives.
The court also considered that both Muganho and Mushanigwa had participated in registering the estate and were recognised as wives by the Master of the High Court, and that all three women had been involved in family arrangements concerning rental income from the deceased’s properties.
Justice Tsanga found that Makoni had established her own status as a wife but had failed to prove that the other two marriages had ceased to exist. The claim was dismissed with costs.
The ruling underscores the distinction in customary law between living apart and legally ending a marriage.
More: The Herald
Leave a Reply Cancel reply