The Northern Cape High Court in Kimberly ruled against man who paid R5,000 lobola and later claimed the lobola letter was forged and the money was meant for the wife's cleansing ceremony after suffering a miscarriage.
The order was made during a divorce between the couple when the man told the court that they were never married meanwhile the wife was of a different opinion.
The wife told the court that she met her husband in 2004 when she was in Grade 11 while the husband was still a tenant at her mother’s house.
After some time, he proposed marriage, and preparations were made for her to meet his family.
Sometime in December 2009, she went to visit his family in Lesotho. She said she arrived on a Saturday and was told to enter the house at night because his father was not supposed to see her.
The following day, his family hosted a ceremony in her honour, during which a sheep was slaughtered, and she was made to eat the rib of the sheep. She said she was then dressed in traditional Shweshwe and was informed that it was the bride's attire.
She handed in photos of the day as evidence.
A witness who testified on behalf of the wife, told the court that in April 2010, he was part of the entourage that represented the wife at her family home during the lobola negotiations.
The witness said during the negotiations, the husband was charged twelve cows and one cow represented R1,000. The man's family paid R5,000 and it was agreed that the balance would be paid at a later stage.
The lobola agreement was put in writing and signed by some of the negotiators. The agreement together with the lobola letter was handed in as evidence.
The witness noted that once the formalities were concluded, a small celebration took place; however, the groom was absent, in accordance with BaSotho and BaTswana cultural practices.
The witness disputed the husband's evidence that the lobola negotiations were postponed because the wife had a miscarriage, and a cleansing ceremony had to be performed first.
Instead, he said their culture does not require a cleansing ceremony after a miscarriage.
In his evidence, the husband confirmed that they met in 2004, and she fell pregnant in 2009.
He said he took her to Lesotho in December 2009 to meet his family.
He explained that he brought her to meet his family because she had asked for his financial assistance with her studies, and he felt it was important to introduce them to the person he intended to support.
He denied that he had proposed to her but admitted that he had told his family that she was someone he would be able to live with.
He admitted that a sheep was slaughtered to welcome the woman and that his sister made her a Shweshwe garment which he paid for. However, he denied that she was treated or recognised as his wife.
He said the celebration was held because he had introduced her as someone, he had an intention to marry.
Regarding the lobola negations, he said they were postponed because of venue issues. He explained that the R5,000 was paid for the cleansing ceremony because she had suffered a miscarriage.
He said in his culture; the cleansing ceremony was important, and it couldn't be overlooked.
Furthermore, he said they lived together as life partners and agreed that because he was paying for her education and driving lessons, he won't pay for lobola.
He argued that the lobola letter submitted in court was forged. He claimed to have seen the forged letter in 2015 when he received a letter of demand from his wife's erstwhile attorneys.
His father also testified and supported his son's version.
He said they only slaughtered a sheep to welcome the woman as a guest and denied giving the woman a new name during the ceremony.
Judge Cecile Williams presided over the case and stated that the probabilities favour the woman's account, indicating that lobola negotiations occurred in April 2010, during which R5,000 was paid by the man's family as outlined in the lobola letter.
The judge further added that the woman and her witness were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but were not budged.
The judge ruled that a valid customary marriage was concluded between the parties.
The man was ordered to pay the costs of the application.