Siqhubeka nokubheka ubudlelwano kwabobulili obufanayo
UMTHETHOSISEKELO waseNingizimu Afrika uyakuvuma ukuganana nokuthandana kwabantu bobulili obufanayo kodwa kuningi okugcina sekushayisana kulobu budlelwano uma sekulandelwa ukusebenza komthetho ikakhulukazi ekwabiweni kwamafa. Ecaleni likamufi uLaubscher NO v Duplan and others lowezi-2017 uCornelius wayeganene noDuplan bengamadoda bobabili.
Ekuthandaneni kwabo babezibophezele ngokuthi bayohlukaniswa ukufa futhi besekana ngazo zonke izindlela, kodwa ukuganana kwabo babengakubhalisile ngaphansi komthetho iCivil Union Act 17 of 2006. ULaubscher washona engazange alabe ifa lakhe futhi engenabo nabantu bomndeni ngoba nabazali bakhe base bashona.
Ngokuhamba kwezikhathi kwavela ukuthi uLaubscher wayenaye umfowabo, uDkt uRasmus Laubscher, owafaka isicelo sokwengamela konke okwabe kungokukamufi kuze kufike isikhathi lapho kwabiwa khona ngendlela ifa lakhe. Nguye owayefake udaba eNkantolo Enkulu efisa kuvele ubufakazi bokuthi umuntu onelungelo lefa likaLaubscher nguyena njengomfowabo noma isithandwa sakhe seminyaka u-Eric yini.
Ngesikhathi sokulalelwa kodaba kwavela ukuthi ngokweSigaba 1(1) somthetho i-Intestate Succession Act 81 of 1987 kuthiwa: “Uma umuntu edlule emhlabeni engazange alabe ifa lakhe, kodwa enomyeni noma unkosikazi, lowo nguye oyothola amafa.” Kwavela nasecaleni likaKolver NO and Others ngowezi-2007 lapho inkantolo yanquma ukuthi amagama athi “noma umlingani” kumele alandele lelo elithi “unkosikazi noma indoda” ngokulandela incazelo equkethwe eSigabeni 1 (1) somthetho.
ISigaba 1 somthetho iCivil Union Act sithi: “iCivil union” ichaza ukuzibophezela ngokuthandana kwabantu ababili abaneminyaka eli-18 nangaphezulu ubudlelwano babo obubhaliswa njengomshado noma ukuhlalisana ngokulandela umthetho. Kuphinde futhi kuvele ukuthi iSigaba 1 somthetho ofanayo sithi: ‘iCivil union partner” sichaza umuntu enibambisene naye emshadweni noma enihlalisene naye ebudlelwaneni. Umthetho uthi umuntu enibambisene naye ebudlelwaneni uthathwa ngumthetho njengokhona empilweni yakho futhi awukho umthetho ombandlululayo kuhlanganisa icommon law necivil union partner.
ULaubscher owayefake isicelo eNkantolo Enkulu wayecabanga ukuthi kuba ngumlingani ongaphansi kwecivil union kuphela ongakwazi ukuthola amafa, kodwa uDupla wayemi kwelokuthi isinqumo esathathwa ecaleni likaGory simnika ilungelo lokuthatha lonke ifa. INkantolo Enkulu esinqumweni sayo yathi iboshwe isinqumo secala likaGory, yanquma ukuthi uDuplan nguye onelungelo lefa. Uma sibuyela ecaleni likaGory elasetshenziswa njengesibonelo, owayefake isicelo kwabe kunguMnu uMark Gory owayethandana nomufi uHenry Harrison Brooks.
Ngesikhathi uBrooks edlula emhlabeni ngoMbasa wezi-2005 abazali bakhe baphakamisa igama likaMnu uGerhardus Kolver ukuba aqokwe uMaster weNkantolo Enkulu ePitoli ukuba kube nguye othatha amafa kamufi. Lokho akuzwakalanga kahle kuMnu uGory owafaka udaba eNkantolo Enkulu ePitoli ngoMfumfu wezi-2005. NgoNdasa wezi-2016 uMehluleli uHartzenberg wakhipha isinqumo esathi, ukushiywa kweSigaba 1(1) somthetho i-Intestate Succession Act, 81 of 1987 emuva kwegama elithi “esishade” noma elithi “umlingani” kulabo abasuke befunge bagomela ukuthi ebudlelwaneni babo bayohlukaniswa ukufa bazibophezela nangokwesekana, kuyashayisana noMththosisekelo waseNingizimu Afrika.
INkantolo yanquma ukuthi ofake isimangalo kanye nomufi uHenry Harrison Brooks, ngesikhathi sokufa kwakhe babethandana ebudlelwaneni babantu bobulili obufanayo futhi babezibophezele nangokusizana. INkantolo yakhipha isinqumo esavuna uHenry Harrison Brooks. Leli cala beliyisibonelo nje uMehluleli alisebenzisa, kodwa uma sesibuyela ecaleni likaLaubscher esiqale ngalo, yena wabe esedlulisela icala eNkantolo YoMthethosisekelo ephonsela inselelo isinqumo seNkantolo Enkulu.
