, LJU4804 EXAMINATION PORTFOLIO SEMESTER 2
DUE DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2026
QUESTION 1
1.1 Legal system governing the material validity of the marriage
The material validity of the Singhs’ marriage is governed by the law of domicile of
each party. Under South African private international law, the capacity of each
person to marry is generally determined separately according to that person’s law
of domicile. This means that Mr Singh’s capacity is governed by English law, while
Mrs Singh ’ s capacity is also governed by English law because both parties were
domiciled in England when they married. Therefore, English law determines whether
both parties had the legal capacity to enter into the marriage.
1.2 Marriage concluded to evade English law
The answer may be different if the parties deliberately travelled to Hawaii to avoid
English law ’ s requirement for parental consent for a person below the age of
eighteen to marry.
Under South African private international law, the law of domicile generally
determines the material validity of a marriage. A person cannot necessarily avoid a
personal legal requirement simply by travelling to another country to conclude a
marriage under more favourable laws. This is associated with the doctrine of evasion
of the law.
If the parties deliberately arranged the marriage in Hawaii to avoid a requirement
imposed by English law, a South African court may consider whether the marriage
should be recognised despite the evasion. The court would examine the purpose of
the trip, the circumstances surrounding the marriage and the relevant principles of
public policy.
However, the mere fact that a marriage takes place in another country does not
automatically make it invalid. The court must distinguish between legitimately
, marrying abroad and deliberately evading a mandatory rule of the parties ’
personal law.
In this case, Mrs Singh was seventeen years old and domiciled in England at the time
of the marriage. If parental consent was legally required under the applicable English
law and the marriage was deliberately arranged to avoid that requirement, the court
may refuse to recognise the marriage on that basis. The outcome would depend on
the applicable legal rules and the evidence establishing the alleged evasion.
1.3 Formal validity of the marriage
The formal validity of the Singhs ’ marriage is governed by the law of the place
where the marriage was celebrated, known as the lex loci celebrationis.
Since the parties married in Hawaii, the formal requirements for a valid marriage are
determined by Hawaiian law. If the marriage complied with the applicable formal
requirements in Hawaii, it will generally be recognised as formally valid in South
Africa, subject to any applicable exceptions.
1.4 Law applicable to divorce matters
Divorce matters are generally governed by the law of the forum, known as the lex
fori. Since Mrs Singh instituted divorce proceedings in a South African High Court,
South African law governs the divorce proceedings, provided that the court has
jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The court will therefore apply the relevant provisions of the South African Divorce
Act 70 of 1979 and other applicable South African law when determining the divorce
and the relief available to the parties.
1.5 Formal validity of Mr Singh’s will
A South African court may regard Mr Singh ’ s will as formally valid under section
3bis(1)(e) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953.
This provision recognises the formal validity of a will executed aboard a vessel or
aircraft if its form complies with the internal law of the state in which the vessel or
DUE DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2026
QUESTION 1
1.1 Legal system governing the material validity of the marriage
The material validity of the Singhs’ marriage is governed by the law of domicile of
each party. Under South African private international law, the capacity of each
person to marry is generally determined separately according to that person’s law
of domicile. This means that Mr Singh’s capacity is governed by English law, while
Mrs Singh ’ s capacity is also governed by English law because both parties were
domiciled in England when they married. Therefore, English law determines whether
both parties had the legal capacity to enter into the marriage.
1.2 Marriage concluded to evade English law
The answer may be different if the parties deliberately travelled to Hawaii to avoid
English law ’ s requirement for parental consent for a person below the age of
eighteen to marry.
Under South African private international law, the law of domicile generally
determines the material validity of a marriage. A person cannot necessarily avoid a
personal legal requirement simply by travelling to another country to conclude a
marriage under more favourable laws. This is associated with the doctrine of evasion
of the law.
If the parties deliberately arranged the marriage in Hawaii to avoid a requirement
imposed by English law, a South African court may consider whether the marriage
should be recognised despite the evasion. The court would examine the purpose of
the trip, the circumstances surrounding the marriage and the relevant principles of
public policy.
However, the mere fact that a marriage takes place in another country does not
automatically make it invalid. The court must distinguish between legitimately
, marrying abroad and deliberately evading a mandatory rule of the parties ’
personal law.
In this case, Mrs Singh was seventeen years old and domiciled in England at the time
of the marriage. If parental consent was legally required under the applicable English
law and the marriage was deliberately arranged to avoid that requirement, the court
may refuse to recognise the marriage on that basis. The outcome would depend on
the applicable legal rules and the evidence establishing the alleged evasion.
1.3 Formal validity of the marriage
The formal validity of the Singhs ’ marriage is governed by the law of the place
where the marriage was celebrated, known as the lex loci celebrationis.
Since the parties married in Hawaii, the formal requirements for a valid marriage are
determined by Hawaiian law. If the marriage complied with the applicable formal
requirements in Hawaii, it will generally be recognised as formally valid in South
Africa, subject to any applicable exceptions.
1.4 Law applicable to divorce matters
Divorce matters are generally governed by the law of the forum, known as the lex
fori. Since Mrs Singh instituted divorce proceedings in a South African High Court,
South African law governs the divorce proceedings, provided that the court has
jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The court will therefore apply the relevant provisions of the South African Divorce
Act 70 of 1979 and other applicable South African law when determining the divorce
and the relief available to the parties.
1.5 Formal validity of Mr Singh’s will
A South African court may regard Mr Singh ’ s will as formally valid under section
3bis(1)(e) of the Wills Act 7 of 1953.
This provision recognises the formal validity of a will executed aboard a vessel or
aircraft if its form complies with the internal law of the state in which the vessel or
