We are here not concerned with the incidents of Native Marriage in the sense of what the rites and formalities of a Native Marriage are. This was fully set out in the case In re Adele Sapara Caveatrix (1911) Renner Cold Coast Report 604. In Savage v. Macfoy (1909) Renner Cold Coast Report 504, Osborne, C.J., defines what must be proved as essentials to a Native Marriage. The question here is, what standard of proof should a Court require to satisfy itself that a marriage took place in accordance with Native Law and Custom? Ayodele Pomphilo gave evidence that she went through that form of marriage with the deceased; she stated that many of her relatives were present at the ceremony when the dowry was brought to her parents; she referred to some close relations of the deceased who brought the dowry; the three persons she could remember were dead; there were many others, according to her, but she could not remember any of those who were still alive. Then she mentioned a friend of the deceased who was present at the ceremony and who had come with the deceased to see her parents. There was no evidence that this friend Sebastian Pedro was not alive; in fact, Counsel admitted in this Court he is alive and active, yet he was not called to give evidence. The only other witness called to prove the marriage was Isaac Pomphilo, her brother. Apart from the evidence of these two (brother and sister) there was no other evidence to prove this marriage. Whilst in certain circumstances this evidence may be enough to prove a marriage in accordance with Native Law and Custom, I am of the view that it falls short of the standard of proof required to invalidate a marriage under the Marriage Ordinance, which was celebrated in public after parties to it have sworn to affidavits before the Registrar of Marriages, and one of such parties is not alive to deny an allegation that he had sworn to a false affidavit.
LawCompass
… the Digital Solution Research Tool
