Joseph Baguma v Sefuroza Matende (Civil Suit No.MFP 12 of 1985)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
Held that a valid customary marriage existed between the deceased and the defendant despite the deceased's prior monogamous church marriage, because the customary marriage pre-dated the Customary Marriage Registration Decree 1973. Held further that the deceased's first wife, though not divorced, was separated from the deceased as a member of the same household under s.31 Succession Act and therefore took no interest in the estate. The defendant, having jointly contributed to building the estate with the deceased, was the proper person to be granted letters of administration. The suit seeking revocation was dismissed.
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for revocation of letters of administration dismissed; defendant to continue administering the estate
Facts
Eridadi Matende died intestate on 16 December 1984. He had married Molly Matende in church in 1957, and they had four children. In the late 1960s, Eridadi moved to Kabarole District and entered a customary marriage with the defendant Sefuroza Matende, with whom he cohabited until his death and had three children. Molly remained in Rukungiri and had not visited Eridadi from 1973 until his death. Evidence showed Molly had additional children with other men, causing separation. After Eridadi's death, the defendant obtained letters of administration for the estate at Kijura. The plaintiff, Eridadi's eldest son by Molly, sought revocation of those letters, arguing the defendant was not a lawful wife and had not properly administered the estate. The estate at Rukungiri had been sold by Molly and the plaintiff after Eridadi's death.
Issues
- Whether the defendant was the wife of the deceased as solemnly declared.
- Whether Molly Matende was married to the deceased at the time of his death.
- Whether the defendant was the proper person to apply for letters of administration.
- Whether the defendant administered the estate properly.
- Whether the letters of administration granted to the defendant should be revoked.
- Whether Molly Matende was entitled to any part of the estate or at all.
Orders
- Suit dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
- Letters of administration granted to the defendant to remain valid and in force.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (15)
- Succession Act Cap 139 s.31
- Succession Act s.56(1)
- Succession Act s.201
- Succession Act s.233(1)(e)
- Succession Act s.235
- Succession Act s.234
- Succession Act s.268
- Succession Act s.280
- Customary Marriage Registration Decree (Decree 16/73) s.11
- Marriage Act Cap 211 s.21
- Marriage Act s.37
- Evidence Act s.119(1)
- Magistrates Court Act 1970 s.242
- Decree 22 of 1972
- Decree 25 of 1971
Cases cited (6)
- Rex v Ouma s/o Ahad (1910-20) 2 ULR 152
- Uganda v Kato & 3 others (1976) HCB 261
- Farzia Rwobuganda v Donato Banemuka (1978) HCB 244
- Rimmer v Rimmer [1952] 2 All ER 863
- Nyendohwa Lucy v Nyendohwa Robert and Another (Civil Suit No. 1068 of 1983)
- Francis Ddiba Nduga v Rita Nansikombi and Others (1980) HCB
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.