, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT
QUESTION 1
1.1. Which legal system applies to the material validity of Patrick and Ruth’s marriage in terms
of the South African rules of private international law?
The material validity of Patrick and Ruth's marriage would be governed by the lex loci celebrationis
(the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated), which in this case is Zanzibar (Tanzania).
According to South African private international law, the material validity of a marriage is
determined by the law of the country where it was concluded1.
1.2. Would your answer to 1.1 above be different if it emerged that the parties married in
Zanzibar to evade the mandatory requirements of Zambian law concerning parental consent for
minors to enter into marriage? Discuss.
If it emerges that the parties married in Zanzibar to evade the mandatory parental consent
requirement for minors under Zambian law, the outcome might change. The law of the lex patriae
(the law of the parties' nationality) could be applied, since Zambian law might claim jurisdiction
based on the nationality of the parties at the time of marriage. In South African private international
law, evasion of local laws (such as the parental consent for minors) can affect the validity of the
marriage1.
In this case, South African courts would likely still apply Tanzanian law as the lex loci celebrationis,
but the intent to avoid Zambian law could raise issues of public policy and could result in South
African courts potentially disregarding the marriage's recognition if the evasion is seen as a breach of
the public policy principles of Zambia1.
1.3. Which legal system(s) govern the formal and material validity of an antenuptial contract
according to the principles of South African private international law?
The antenuptial contract, which governs the proprietary consequences of the marriage, will be
subject to the lex domicilii matrimonii (the law of the matrimonial domicile), which in this case is
South Africa. This is because the parties moved to South Africa shortly after their marriage and
established their domicile there1.
1: (LJU4804, Study Guide, p. 8)
QUESTION 1
1.1. Which legal system applies to the material validity of Patrick and Ruth’s marriage in terms
of the South African rules of private international law?
The material validity of Patrick and Ruth's marriage would be governed by the lex loci celebrationis
(the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated), which in this case is Zanzibar (Tanzania).
According to South African private international law, the material validity of a marriage is
determined by the law of the country where it was concluded1.
1.2. Would your answer to 1.1 above be different if it emerged that the parties married in
Zanzibar to evade the mandatory requirements of Zambian law concerning parental consent for
minors to enter into marriage? Discuss.
If it emerges that the parties married in Zanzibar to evade the mandatory parental consent
requirement for minors under Zambian law, the outcome might change. The law of the lex patriae
(the law of the parties' nationality) could be applied, since Zambian law might claim jurisdiction
based on the nationality of the parties at the time of marriage. In South African private international
law, evasion of local laws (such as the parental consent for minors) can affect the validity of the
marriage1.
In this case, South African courts would likely still apply Tanzanian law as the lex loci celebrationis,
but the intent to avoid Zambian law could raise issues of public policy and could result in South
African courts potentially disregarding the marriage's recognition if the evasion is seen as a breach of
the public policy principles of Zambia1.
1.3. Which legal system(s) govern the formal and material validity of an antenuptial contract
according to the principles of South African private international law?
The antenuptial contract, which governs the proprietary consequences of the marriage, will be
subject to the lex domicilii matrimonii (the law of the matrimonial domicile), which in this case is
South Africa. This is because the parties moved to South Africa shortly after their marriage and
established their domicile there1.
1: (LJU4804, Study Guide, p. 8)
