Case Law[2025] ZAWCHC 319South Africa
Njwaxu v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (23272/24) [2025] ZAWCHC 319 (29 July 2025)
Headnotes
in abeyance pending the enquiry by the registering officer or the investigation by this court, whichever brings finality to the applicant's application.
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
>>
2025
>>
[2025] ZAWCHC 319
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Njwaxu v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (23272/24) [2025] ZAWCHC 319 (29 July 2025)
Njwaxu v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (23272/24) [2025] ZAWCHC 319 (29 July 2025)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAWCHC/Data/2025_319.html
sino date 29 July 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
(WESTERN CAPE DIVISION,
CAPE TOWN)
Case No: 23272/24
In
the matter between
ZUKISWA
NJWAXU
Applicant
AND
THE
MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS
1
st
Respondent
THE
DIRECTOR -GENERAL: DEPARTMENT OF HOME
2
nd
Respondent
AFFAIRS
THE
MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN
3
rd
Respondent
Heard:
30 April 2025
Delivered:
29 July 2025
JUDGMENT
THULARE J
ORDER
(a)
The issue of the registration of the
marriage is remitted back to a registering officer at the Department
of Home Affairs.
(b)
The Director-General of DHA is directed to
appoint a registering officer within 5 business days of this order.
(c)
The registering officer shall enquire into
the existence of the alleged customary marriage and decide thereon on
or before Friday
26 September 2025. The enquiry shall include but not
be limited to, the immediate family members of the deceased
Mzwandile, including
his paternal aunts and maternal uncles if any,
as well as the friends and neighbours to which the applicant referred
to in her
application before this court as well as the immediate
family members of the applicant including her paternal aunts and
maternal
uncles if any.
(d)
The registering officer may consider expert
evidence.
(e)
Should the registering officer refuse to
register the alleged marriage after the enquiry, the applicant shall
set the matter down
on notice to Mzwandile’s immediate
relatives, in particular those who but for the applicant and her son,
would have been
his heirs in intestate succession, for oral evidence
in continuation of the investigation by this court, such date of set
down
to be arranged with Thulare Js secretary.
(f)
Should the registering officer refuse to
register the alleged marriage after the enquiry, he/she/they shall
file the full record
of their enquiry with the registrar of this
court within 10 business days of such refusal.
(g)
The first and second respondents, jointly
and severally, the one to pay the other to be absolved, to pay the
costs.
(h)
The decision on the Master is held in
abeyance pending the enquiry by the registering officer or the
investigation by this court,
whichever brings finality to the
applicant's application.
[1] In an unopposed
application for default judgment the applicant sought an order that
the Minister and Director-General of Home
Affairs be directed to
accept and recognize posthumously registration of the alleged
applicant and late Mzwandile Komsana's customary
marriage as a
customary marriage in terms of sections 2(1) and 4(7) of the
Recognition of Customary Marriages Act, 1998 (Act No.
120 of 1998)
(the RCMA); to register the marriage between the two as a valid
customary marriage in terms of the RCMA; to issue
the applicant with
a marriage certificate within 14 days of the date of such order; an
order directing the Master to register the
estate of the late
Mzwandile and appoint the applicant as the executrix of that estate
and costs in the event of opposition.
[2] The applicant's case
was that she met Mzwandile in 2010 in Cape Town. Very soon after
their first meeting they became romantically
involved. She was 27 and
he was 26 years of age. Mzwandile lived with his brother at the time.
After a few months Mzwandile moved
in to live with her and her son.
After two years he said that he wanted to marry her and spoke to her
brother also named Mzwandile.
In December 2013 both went to their
different homes in the Eastern Cape. Whilst in Eastern Cape Mzwandile
asked her to visit his
family, where he introduced her to his father,
two brothers and two sisters. She did not know that he planned to
marry her that
day. His father introduced her to the whole family,
friends and neighbours. His father called her father and told him
that his
daughter was safe and was now part of the Komsana family.
The following day Mzwandile's father called her father and lobola
negotiations
began. The Komsana's slaughtered a sheep which was
prepared and all ate. They gave her traditional clothes which was a
traditional
dress, a black and white dookie and a blanket and she
then became a makoti, the wife of Mzwandile. Mzwandile's family paid
R20 000
to her father. They had to pay a balance of R30 000-00
which Mzwandile could not afford at the time. Five cows were to be
given to her family but there were logistical concerns in
transporting the cows to her mother's house. The fathers agreed to
abandon
this part of the agreement as her home was too far, and what
remained outstanding of the lobola was the R30 000-00.
Mzwandile's
family accepted her, and she was given the name Asakhe,
which meant they were to build a home together. They were regarded as
married
according to custom. After a week they returned to Cape Town.
[3] They struggled to
have children and received treatment at the local clinic to assist
them. Mzwandile worked as a security guard,
and she worked as a
technician and both worked shifts. Years later, in 2015, they went to
Home affairs to register their marriage.
They waited in a long queue
only to be told that Home Affairs moved to a new system and they
could not register their marriage
that day. They had to book to
register. She did not recall what happened and they did not book a
date. They worked, supported each
other financially and tried to get
healthy for conception. They had every intention to register the
marriage but did not. They
stayed together in rented accommodation
for 13 years from 2010 to 2023. They bought a house in Khayelitsha in
2023 and lived in
it together as husband and wife with their son, who
Mzwandile accepted as his own. Mzwandile died in a car accident on
his way
from work on 6 July 2024. When she tried to register the
deceased estate at the Master's Office in Cape Town she was told to
get
an attorney. When the attorney approached the Master, the Master
advised that she approach the Department of Home Affairs (DHA)
to
register the marriage first before they could proceed. She approached
DHA in Khayelitsha on 4 September 2024, and the manager
there told
her that the department which dealt with customary marriages was
permanently closed in all branches and they did not
know when it
would open. DHA could not assist her.
[4] All the institutions
where Mzwandile held interests required a marriage certificate and
letter of authority to assist her. This
included his pension fund and
the bank's home loan division. Mzwandile Njwaxu deposed to a
supporting affidavit where he simply
said that he had read the
applicants affidavit and confirmed the contents thereof as correct in
so far as it related to him. Sanelisiwe
Komsana, on 29 July 2024
deposed to an affidavit where she identified Mzwandile as her brother
and declared that the applicant
was customarily married to Mzwandile
in 2013. In her affidavit the applicant alleges that whilst
Sanelisiwe initially assisted
her, she did not assist her anymore,
and that Mzwandile's family did not want to have anything to do with
her and her son. The
applicant also has a supporting affidavit by one
Thandolwethu Komsana, who alleged that Mzwandile was his mother’s
brother
and that he at times lived with Mzwandile. He stated that
Mzwandile married the applicant on 25 December 2013 and that since
then
the applicant and Mzwandile lived together as husband and wife
until his death. The applicant in a supplementary affidavit appended
two copies of policies wherein she appears registered as the spouse
of Mzwandile.
[5] Section 4(7)(a) of
the RCMA provides as follows:
4
Registration
of customary marriages
(7) A court may, upon
application made to that court and upon investigation instituted by
that court, order-
(a)
the
registration of any customary marriage;
[6] There are two major
concerns with the path of travel of this application on its way to
court. The first is that there was no
investigation and pronouncement
by a registering officer at DHA. The Minister and the
Director-General elected to abide the decision
of the court. In the
absence of countervailing evidence from DHA, I must accept that DHA
closed an internal department that deals
with the registration of
customary marriages permanently in all branches and its branch
manager in Khayelitsha did not know when
these departments will open.
The applicant, and by extension persons who have uncertain or
disputed customary marriages, in the
main African vulnerable women,
which disputes had the tendency to impact adversely on the welfare
and in particular inheritance
of those vulnerable women and children,
were left unattended in their hour of need, by DHA. The Minister and
Director-general of
DHA need to lead that required public service
with conviction, vision and credibility. In a matter like the
present, with the serious
allegations made by the applicant, to wit,
that she was denied a statutory public service to which she was
entitled, silence was
not an option for the Minister and the
Director-General. Whoever advised them to put their heads in the sand
and pray for the issue
of such national importance to disappear,
needed to explain themselves. It is shocking that a Minister and a
Director-General would
have no response to an allegation by an
emotionally and financially distressed alleged widow that the
Department they provide political
oversight over and lead,
respectively, failed to provide her with a public service that the
Department was constitutionally obliged
to provide. It seems to me
that an answer to Parliament may be called for, unless Parliament saw
nothing wrong with what seems
to be a condescending attitude to
customary law and customary marriages. If DHA did what was its duty,
and enquired into the marriage
and made a decision, it may be that
the application to court would not have been necessary, and the
applicant would have been spared
high costs of High Court litigation.
[7] The second concern
also ties in with and extends the first. There is always a risk of a
customary marriage being polygamous.
The applicant said nothing about
this risk. The papers are silent as to whether there would be other
heirs of the deceased by affinity,
or through procreation. This leads
me to the need for the courts to consider the role of the family in
the contract of a customary
marriage. It is not clear why the
applicant elected not to cause the application to be served on the
available family members of
Mzwandile. In
Reform of Customary
Marriage, Divorce and Succession in South Africa, Living Customary
Law and Social Realities, Summary Research
Report
by Chuma
Himonga and Elena Moore, page 15, 3.1.5, the authors said:
“
3.1.5 The role of
the family in the contract of marriage
It is evident from both
the court decisions reviewed and the practices of people on the
ground that meeting the requirements of
a customary marriage under
the RCMA involves not just the prospective parties to the marriage
but their families as well. The involvement
of the families is
central to the negotiation of the marriage, particularly with regard
to lobolo and the handing over of the wife
to her husband’s
family. The predominance of the family and the greater role played by
it in the marriage negotiation than
by the parties to the marriage is
also evident from cases in which neither of the prospective spouses
took part in the negotiation
of their marriages, leaving the whole
process to their families or elders.
'
At page 16 para 3.1.7 the
authors continued:
'
3.1.7
Broader strategies for proving the existence of customary marriages
The findings of this
study on the way marriages are negotiated in practice, particularly
with regard to the involvement of the family,
suggest that the
Department of Justice (through the Bench Book) should direct the
courts to pay particular attention to the involvement
of the families
of the parties in issues concerning proof of a valid marriage.
Furthermore, if the court took account of the public
nature of the
marriage, they could call upon a wider range of witnesses to validate
the existence of the marriage.
'
[8] This matter required
a member of staff in DHA who was skilled in registering customary
marriages, who understood the requirements
for registering customary
marriages. It required a registering officer who also understood the
role of a registering officer, including
the responsibility to
enquire into the existence of a marriage upon application by the
person in the position of the applicant.
Upon such enquiry and if the
registering officer was not satisfied that
a valid
customary marriage was entered into by the spouses, he or she must
refuse to register the marriage. It is not clear whether
DHA did not
have available registering officers, or its registering officers were
not trained. In this matter, there is no record
of a refusal of a
registering officer to register the applicant’s alleged
marriage. In fact, DHA by its conduct denied the
applicant an
opportunity to apply to it for the enquiry.
[9]
Under the circumstances, it is necessary that the investigation of
this court, which inherently is an inquiry to establish the
truth and
carry out research into a subject, must include referral of the
matter back to DHA for a marriage officer to be appointed
and for
such marriage officer to amongst others comply with the provisions of
sections 4(5) and (6) of the RCMA. It seems to me
that DHA had
concerns as to whether the marriage was concluded in accordance with
the isiXhosa custom. It is worth mentioning that
the applicant's
alleged marriage appear to have been concluded under different norms
and procedures than the ordinary, for example
a father to father
telephonic call as a form of negotiation as opposed to the inclusion
of uDabawo/Rakgadi (paternal aunt) and
uMalume/Malome (maternal
uncle) as the ordinary elders leading such processes and the sending
of uNozakuzaku/Mmaditsela (emissaries),
and the absence of the
delivery of the bride. DHA should promote research of the cultural
and legal norms in our diversity and
pluralism through its
registering officers, instead of closing internal departments and
service centres which were to serve the
public in uncertain or
disputed customary marriages. Whether the marriage was concluded in
accordance with custom or not is a question
that should be determined
by custom and customary law. The applicant, including her brother
Mzwandile, Sanelisiwe and Thandolwethu
failed to adduce factual
evidence and where necessary even expert evidence to guide any
determiner of fact in the determination
of the issue [
Thulare
v Thulare and Others (470/2023)
[2025] ZASCA 100
(7 July 2025) at
para 10. At para 11 the SCA said:
'
[11] Disputes
of this kind require evidence-based resolution. In the absence of the
requisite evidence, the high court was
not properly equipped to make
any determination as to who constitutes the royal family. Nor is this
Court able to do so on appeal.
'
For these reasons the
order was made.
Applicant
Counsel: Michaek Garces
michaelgarces@advchambers.com
Instructing
Attorney: VPR
trish@vprattorneys.com
1
st
and 2
nd
Respondent Counsel: Ms Mahlaba
NkoMahlaba@justice.gov.za
DM THULARE
JUDGE OF THE HIGH
COURT
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Ngwane v Minister of Police and Another (124422/2020) [2025] ZAWCHC 459 (8 October 2025)
[2025] ZAWCHC 459High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar
G.W.X. v Magistrate of Regional Division of Western Cape Blue Downs Mashala N.O and Another (17268/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 142 (27 March 2025)
[2025] ZAWCHC 142High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar
Bewley v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (2025/019372) [2025] ZAWCHC 477 (15 May 2025)
[2025] ZAWCHC 477High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar
Minister in the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure v Tuiniqua (Pty) Ltd t/a Tuiniqua Consulting Engineers (15113/2020) [2025] ZAWCHC 412 (5 September 2025)
[2025] ZAWCHC 412High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar
Modack v Minister of Police and Others (21348/2019) [2023] ZAWCHC 108 (4 May 2023)
[2023] ZAWCHC 108High Court of South Africa (Western Cape Division)99% similar