- A customary wife’s lack of financial dependency cost her the benefit, while the cohabiting girlfriend and children were prioritised.
- Adjudicator Muvhango Lukhaimane stressed that posthumous marriage registration does not guarantee a death benefit.
- Pension fund boards favour factual financial support over legal marital status.
A legal customary wife who registered her marriage months after her husband’s death has lost her claim to a R4.5 million death benefit. This amount was allocated instead to his four children and his girlfriend.
The complainant believed that a lobola letter from September 2022 and a marriage certificate registered posthumously in March 2024 entitled her to part of the payout, relying on the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act. However, outgoing Pension Funds Adjudicator Muvhango Lukhaimane emphasised that legal status alone does not prove dependency; that is the key factor in death benefit allocation.
The complainant told the Adjudicator’s office: “I was legally married; I shared my life with him, and he supported me with groceries and cash.” She argued that posthumous registration protected surviving spouses and “should automatically entitle me to a benefit.”
She questioned why the deceased had listed himself as single in insurance documents. Despite her claims, she was unable to provide bank statements, invoices, or any formal proof of financial reliance, leaving her claim unsupported.
Cohabitation and real-world support
In contrast, the girlfriend provided documentation showing that she had lived with the deceased from June 2022 until his death in September 2023. They shared household expenses, and she received regular payments.
One of the deceased’s daughters confirmed that her father lived with the girlfriend and that she “did not know the customary wife,” who was absent from the funeral. Investigators noted that the deceased’s benefit nomination form in April 2023 listed him as single, raising further doubts about the marital claim.
Lukhaimane highlighted the difference between legal status and actual dependency: “The girlfriend and the deceased shared a common household and expenses. Therefore, she qualifies as a factual dependant.” Regarding the customary wife, she added: “While the customary wife qualifies as a legal dependant by virtue of her marriage to the deceased, this does not automatically entitle her to a portion of the death benefit as the death benefit does not belong to the deceased’s estate.”
Marriage on paper is not enough
The complainant maintained she was entitled because “lobola was paid and the marriage was real,” and argued that cultural practices “do not always leave detailed records.” However, Lukhaimane clarified that pension boards must look for objective proof of dependency: “Moreover, there is no evidence that the customary wife was financially reliant on the deceased for maintenance or other reasons.”
Investigators had requested birth certificates, bank statements, and evidence of ongoing support, but “the requested documents were not provided.”
Lukhaimane concluded: “The board did not limit its discretion in the allocation of the deceased’s death benefit, and there is no reason to overturn the board’s decision.” Thus, the ruling confirms that posthumous marriage registration may establish legal status but cannot replace real-world dependency.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
