Former hubby fails to get maintenance from ZITF boss

AN unemployed Bulawayo man’s bid to receive spousal support from his former girlfriend and Zimbabwe International Trade Fair (ZITF) boss Ruth Ncube, hit a brick wall recently after the application was dismissed for lack of merit.

BY SILAS NKALA

Wilson Sezi had filed a $3 800 monthly maintenance claim against Ncube saying they were customarily married and that he was entitled to receive support from her since he was unemployed.

In a ruling delivered on June 22, Bulawayo magistrate Sheunesu Matova said Sezi had failed to prove that he was customarily married to the ZITF boss.

“The applicant instituted for a spousal maintenance from the respondent. He was claiming $3 800.

“The respondent contested the applicant’s claim. She raised preliminary point in her opposing affidavit, the point in limine of which has an effect of disposing of this matter if upheld by this court.

“The respondent technically objected to the applicant’s claim on the grounds that no customary union existed between her and the applicant as the applicant had not paid bride price to her family,” Matova ruled.

“The court in this judgment grapples with the issue of whether or not an unregistered customary union exists between the parties to this case entitling the applicant to claim spousal maintenance.”

Matova said in the affidavit, Ncube disputed claims that she was lawfully married to Sezi in terms of the Customary Marriages Act.

The magistrate said for a customary marriage to subsist, Sezi ought to have followed the customs of his in-laws-to-be.

“Therefore there is no way this court can find that a customary union existed between the parties when the respondent’s family insists that applicant had not complied with essential Ndebele customs for him to be recognised as husband to the respondent,” he ruled.

“For the reasons stated above, the court upholds the preliminary point taken by the applicant that no customary union exists between the parties.
“In the result, it is hereby ordered that the applicant’s claim for spousal maintenance be and is hereby dismissed with no orders as to costs.”

12 Comments

  1. i like this one but why did you leave a lady of means or you were ditched

    1. Very simple, the guy was ditched by the lady coz of the steep difference in personal wealth and also that a second look at the lady u will see a very beautiful lady who doesnt deserve a broke guy. Let him find a vendor or a house maid not a chairperson of such a prestigious entity.

  2. This is a very unfair judgement which goes to show that as men we will always be on the receiving end. Varume ticharamba tichidzvanyirirwa with these women and those who are sympathetic to them.

    If we don’t act and stand for our rights we shall continue to receive a short end of the stick. Men, please wake up for this is a deliberate ploy dehumanize us!!!!!!!

  3. This is a very unfair judgement which goes to show that as men we will always be on the receiving end. Varume ticharamba tichidzvanyirirwa with these women and those who are sympathetic to them.

    If we don’t act and stand for our rights we shall continue to receive a short end of the stick. Men, please wake up for this is a deliberate ploy dehumanize us!!!!!!!

    Men arise please

  4. what form of proof does this sympathiser magistrate need to show the two were married customery manner.men its time we wake up.

  5. If you cohabit with a woman for three months or more you are deemed to be married and will be compelled to pay maintenance…. not if it is the other way round…you get nothing

  6. Even if he had paid lobola; without proper written proof the in-laws and their emissary would not witness in his favour. A lesson for all men keep the signed lobola payment documents forever.

  7. Wish him LUCKY!! next time he submits his BID.

  8. Mandebele Lusaba

    Comment…This has never been witnessed in a case vice vesa. The presiding officer was completely lost.who’mantainence was he applying for anyway? Isn’t it for kids? Shame.

  9. But doesn’t a lobola process involve a man’s family as well or who ever represents him who can then testify in his favour should the other part deny the customary marriage. It does not sound like this man brought any witness or evidence to support his claim and i don’t see why the judge should have ruled in his favour in the absence of proof and witnesses. Did this man go by himself to pay lobola if he did?Obviously not because no culture has a lobola procedings where a man pitches on his own.

  10. this precedent is very wrong. what about if it was the woman who was claiming mantainence will this issue of lobola stands. work up call for you men

  11. we men are so stupid ,we make these laws and let these things happen. the judge has been very unfair,if I cohabit with a woman for 3 months and the woman is entitled to spousal mantainence ,why can’t it be the other way round? I will change all this .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *