An unemployed woman from KwaZulu-Natal, Lulama Felicity Primrose Keth Kunene, has lost her legal battle with the Road Accident Fund (RAF) over a claim for financial support following the death of her partner. The KwaZulu-Natal High Court in Pietermaritzburg ruled that Kunene, who had been in a 13-year relationship with the deceased, failed to prove that she was legally entitled to support from the RAF. Despite the RAF conceding 100% liability for the fatal accident, the court concluded that Kunene could not demonstrate that her relationship with the deceased was recognized as a customary marriage, which was a crucial factor in her claim for compensation.
Kunene had hoped to claim from the RAF after the death of her partner, who she said had been financially supporting her and their children. She explained that she had started a relationship with the deceased in 1998, when he was married, and that over the years, he had paid lobolo (bride price) for her in 2004. Kunene described a life together with the deceased, including the purchase of properties, the birth of two children, and a monthly allowance of R6,000, which he later increased to R8,000. She claimed that the deceased had promised to marry her and even bought property in both their names, making her feel as though they were married, despite the lack of a formal ceremony.
However, during the court proceedings, it emerged that the deceased was living with his wife, only visiting Kunene and the children on weekends. Kunene conceded that the deceased had not actually married her and that the marriage, though promised, had not been fulfilled. She also admitted that she had never met the deceased’s wife and was unsure if she was aware of the relationship. Kunene insisted that the deceased had intended to marry her as his second wife, a claim that was supported by her cousin, who had attended the lobolo negotiations. However, the cousin also admitted that there had been no traditional marriage ceremony to complete the process, nor had the customary law marriage been fully explored.
Kunene’s case was further weakened by testimony from her mother, who also acknowledged that no formal or traditional marriage had taken place between Kunene and the deceased. While she recognized the deceased as her daughter’s partner, she admitted that she was unaware of the existence of the deceased’s first wife until later in the relationship. According to Kunene’s mother, the marriage had not been completed because the deceased had other financial obligations, and he had planned to use his pension to settle the remaining lobolo payment. Despite these circumstances, she maintained that the deceased intended to marry Kunene.
Acting Judge Nako, who presided over the case, concluded that while the couple had an intimate relationship, it was not legally recognized as a marriage under either civil or customary law. The judge noted that the unfulfilled promise of marriage, the separation of assets, and the fact that the deceased was already married, pointed to the relationship being one based on mutual financial support rather than a formal marriage. As a result, Kunene was not entitled to claim loss of support from the RAF, as the legal framework only allows for compensation in cases of formal marriages or legally recognized relationships.
In dismissing Kunene’s application with costs, Judge Nako also pointed out that Kunene could have pursued a customary marriage route with the deceased, but this had not been fully explored. The failure to formalize the relationship under customary law meant that Kunene was not part of the deceased’s larger family unit, which further weakened her claim for support. The ruling has significant implications for the interpretation of relationship dynamics under South African law, particularly in cases where financial support is provided without the formal recognition of marriage.
