Khumalo v Dalmini.pdf - SwaziLII

[8] The deceased child died on the 20th December 2009 in a trafficaccident; and, the Applicant was at her place of employment inEngland. The minder Sisi Ndlovu and Applicant’s sister askedthe First Respondent to assist them in identifying the body in hiscapacity as the father to the deceased.[9] The First Respondent caused the body of the deceased to betaken to the Second Respondent’s mortuary pending burial; hecompleted all necessary documentation and signed themsignifying that he was the person who had brought the deceased.By implication, he is the only person who could signdocumentation releasing the body of the deceased from theSecond Respondent.[10] The two families have reached a deadlock as to the place ofburial of the deceased; each of them wants to bury her. TheApplicant argues that she has the right to bury her partlybecause she has the custody over the deceased and partlybecause she was solely responsible for the support andmaintenance of the deceased during her lifetime. She furtherargues that the First Respondent cannot be heard to seek burialrights over the deceased when he failed to be a parent to herduring her lifetime and that he never bothered to support andmaintain her.[11] The issue before Court relates to the burial rights of the parties.The First Respondent on the other hand argues that he has theright of burial in his capacity as the biological father; and thatafter his divorce with the Applicant, he retained guardianshipover the deceased and that the deceased followed his domicile.He further denies that he failed to support the children; however,he did not submit any proof in the form of receipts for theschool fees he allegedly paid at Mjingo High School, BahaiHigh School, Cefups College and Mathew Phosa College where