Gregory Nikitas v. Blandyna Nikitas, Matrim. Cause 4-DSM-72, 4/7/72, Onyiuke, J.

Gregory Nikitas v. Blandyna Nikitas, Matrim. Cause 4-DSM-72, 4/7/72, Onyiuke, J.

This is a chamber application for directions in a matrimonial cause. The petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of his marriage with his wife on the grounds of desertion. The marriage was contracted in 1948 at the office of the Registrar of Marriages at Lushoto. Section 101 of the Law of Marriage Act, 1971, provides that “No person shall petition for divorce unless he or she has first referred the matrimonial difficulty to a Board and the Board had certified that it has failed to reconcile the parties.’ There are certain exceptions which are not applicable to this case. Section 106(2) of he Act requires every petition for a decree of divorce to be accompanied by a certificate by a Board, issued not more than 6 months before the filing of the petition. The petitioner filed his petition for divorce unaccompanied y a certificate by a Board and without first referring the matrimonial dispute to a Board. Counsel for the petitioner /applicant submitted that Section 101 did not apply to this marriage. His argument can be summarized thus: - (i) The parties to this marriage were married according to Greed Orthodox rites. (ii) The Greek Orthodox religion is not a specified religion under Section 25 (2) of the Act.

(iii) The Greed Orthodox Church has not established a marriage conciliatory board and (iv) Therefore a marriage according to the rites of the Greek Orthodox religion falls outside the purview of Section 101 of the Act.

            Held: (1) “The simple answer to that is that if the religion is not recognized then the marriage according to the rites of hat religion cannot be recognized and there is no marriage for the Court to dissolve. The Court can only dissolve a marriage which comes under the Law of Marriage Act. (2) “The contention was not borne out by the facts. The marriage certificate showed that the marriage was contracted in a Marriage Registry and in a civil form.” (3) “It is doubtful, to say the least, whether it is correct to say that marriage contracted according to the rites of the Greed Orthodox church is not recognized under the Law of Marriage Act. It appears to me to be a marriage in Christian form within the meaning of Section 25 (2) (b) which defines a marriage in Christian Form as a marriage celebrated in a church in the manner recognized by Christian faith or by any denomination of sect of that faith ……… Specified religion is defined by Section 2 to mean Christianity or a religion specified in an order made by Minister under Section 25. As the Greed Orthodox religion is a sect of the Christian faith it is a specified religion.” (4) “Lastly the contention that the Greek Orthodox Church has not established a Conciliatory Committee for its adherents and therefore section 101 does not apply is unsound. Section 102(1) of the Act empowers the Minister to establish in every ward a Board to be known as a Marriage Conciliatory Board. Section 102(2) empowers the Minister where he is satisfied that any community in Tanganyika has established for itself a Committee or a body of persons to perform the functions of a Marriage Conciliatory Board and that it is desirable that such Committee be designated a Conciliatory Board for the purposes of that Act so to designate such Committee or body of persons. Acting under Section 102(1) the Minister by Government Notice No. 108 of 1971, appointed every Arbitration Tribunal established under the Tribunal Regulations 1969 as a Marriage Conciliatory Board for the area over which such Tribunal has jurisdiction. By Regulation 3 of the Arbitration Tribunals Regulation 1969(Government Notice No. 219 of 1969) a tribunal was established in every ward as delineated under the Local Government (Elections) Act 1966. Acting under Section 102(2) of the Law of Marriage Act the Minister by various Governments (elections) Act 1966. Acting under Section 102(2) of the Law of Marriage Act the Minister by various Government Notices published from time to time (e.g. Nos. 196, 211 and 245 of 1971) designated certain Committees or bodies of persons established by various religious communities as Marriage conciliatory Boards for such Communities. It is clear therefore that the fact that the Greed Orthodox community has not established a committee or that their committee has not been designated under Section 102(2) does not exempt the adherents of that religion from referring their matrimonial disputes to the Arbitration Tribunals for their wards under Section 102(1) of the Act.” (5) Petition rejected.