DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS TRUST Tel: [263] [4] 794478 Fax & Messages [263] [4] 793592 E-mail: veritas@mango.zw Veritas makes every effort to ensure the provision of reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied. Judgment No. SC 42/18 Civil Appeal No. SC 84/13 appellant and Amos Chirunda were blessed with three children during the subsistence of their marriage. Sometime after the divorce, Amos Chirunda customarily married the first respondent and they lived together as husband and wife. Their customary union was not registered and neither did the two contract a civil marriage. Amos Chirunda died on 8 December 1997. Until the time of his death, Amos Chirunda lived with the first respondent as his wife. Sometime in February 1998, the appellant was invited to the second respondent’s office where she was asked to register the estate of the late Amos Chirunda in terms of his will. However, on 4 March 1998, the second respondent wrote letters to the appellant where he was seeking to have the appellant return the letters of administration that he had issued her with. The reason that prompted the second respondent to so write was that the appellant and the late Amos Chirunda had since divorced by the time of his death and, therefore, the appellant was disqualified by s 17 of the Wills Act [Chapter 6:06] from administering or inheriting from the estate of the late Amos Chirunda. The appellant did not yield to the second respondent’s request which prompted the first respondent to make an application before the High Court seeking an order revoking the appointment of appellant as executor of the deceased’s estate. The court dismissed the application on the basis that the will did not show any intention on the part of the deceased that his divorce from the appellant would invalidate the will, thereby prompting the first respondent to go on appeal against the dismissal of the application. The court’s decision was based on s 17(1) of the Wills Act [Chapter 6:06]. The first respondent proceeded to note an appeal against that dismissal and the Supreme Court held that the High court had made a finding on the basis of the wrong law, 3