Hulda John v.
This is an appeal from judgment for defendant in an affiliation proceeding under the Affiliation Ordinance, Cap. 278 as amended by the Affiliation Ordinance (Amendment) Act, 1964. Plaintiff lived out of wedlock with the male defendant between 1956 and 1964, having two children by him. During 1966 defendant took up word in Magamba, leaving plaintiff and the two children in
Held: (1) Under s. 5 of the Affiliation Ordinance, plaintiff was required to present evidence other than her own to corroborate her claim, and since she failed to do so, her claim could not succeed. (2) Since the plaintiff had no assistance from counsel in bringing her action, an action which would have been far more likely to succeed if brought in the primary court (see The Law of Persons, Government Notice 279/63, para. 183, which is applicable in primary court and puts the burden of proof on the defendant of her corroborative evidence, the Court ordered the case hear de novo in the district court before a different magistrate. The former proceedings were quashed.
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.