![cover image](https://wikiwandv2-19431.kxcdn.com/_next/image?url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Constitutional_court_of_South_Africa.jpeg/640px-Constitutional_court_of_South_Africa.jpeg&w=640&q=50)
Daniels v Campbell
South African legal case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Daniels v Campbell?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Daniels v Campbell NO and Others, an important case in South African family law and law of succession, was heard in the Constitutional Court on 6 November 2003 and decided on 11 March 2004. The court was unanimous that the constitutional right to equality requires that rights of intestate inheritance and maintenance must be extended to the surviving partners of de facto monogamous Muslim marriages, even though such marriages are not recognised under the Marriage Act, 1961.
Daniels v Campbell | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Court | Constitutional Court of South Africa |
Full case name | Daniels v Campbell NO and Others |
Decided | 11 March 2004 (2004-03-11) |
Docket nos. | CCT 40/ 03 |
Citations | [2004] ZACC 14; 2004 (5) SA 331 (CC); 2004 (7) BCLR 735 (CC) |
Case history | |
Prior actions | Daniels v Campbell NO and Others 2003 (9) BCLR 969 (C) in the High Court of South Africa, Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division |
Related actions | Daniels v Campbell NO and Others [2003] ZAWCHC 41 in the High Court, Cape of Good Hope Provincial Division |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Chaskalson CJ, Langa DCJ, Ackermann J, Madala J, Mokgoro J, Moseneke J, Ngcobo J, O’Regan J, Sachs J and Yacoob J |
Case opinions | |
The word "spouse" as used in the Intestate Succession Act, 1987 includes the surviving partner to a monogamous Muslim marriage, as does the word "survivor" as used in the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act, 1990. | |
Decision by | Sachs J (Chaskalson, Langa, Ackermann, Mokgoro, Ngcobo, O’Regan and Yacoob concurring) |
Concurrence | Ngcobo J (Chaskalson, Langa, Ackermann, Mokgoro, O’Regan, Sachs and Yacoob concurring) |
Dissent | Moseneke J (Madala concurring) |
In dual opinions written by Justices Albie Sachs and Sandile Ngcobo, a majority of the court held that the Intestate Succession Act, 1987 and Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act, 1990 must be read to extend such rights. A minority, comprising Justices Dikgang Moseneke and Tholie Madala, disagreed with this approach, arguing that the legislation refers to lawful marriages under the Marriage Act and that the legislation is therefore unconstitutional in its current form.
The ambit of this judgment was restricted to de facto monogamous Muslim marriages; it was extended to polygamous Muslim marriages in Hassam v Jacobs.