On appeal, the High Court considered a divorce decree. The High Court considered the allegation that African customary law required women to be housekeepers, engage in the domestic sphere, and that failure to fulfill these duties legally could result in a divorce. The High Court agreed that customary requirements of women within the household, when not being fulfilled during the course of a marriage, were sufficient grounds for divorce.
The Second Grade Magistrate Court in Machinga sentenced the appellant to nine months’ imprisonment for the offence of negligently doing an act likely to spread a dangerous disease contrary to Section 192 of the Penal Code when she breastfed another woman’s infant while under treatment for HIV.
The appellant was convicted and sentenced to eight years imprisonment including hard labor for defilement of an11-month-old girl. On appeal, the appellant’s primary argument was that the testimony of the child’s mother was not sufficiently corroborated and therefore the conviction was not supported by the evidence. He also argued that the sentence was excessive.
The accused was convicted of rape and sentenced to a custodial term of imprisonment of 18 months. He appeals on the grounds that the lower court erred in convicting him in contradiction of the Medical Report that found it was a fabricated rape.
The plaintiff appealed to the High Court on the grounds that she was unfairly terminated because of her HIV status. The plaintiff carried the burden of proof to show discriminatory termination. The High Court found that the plaintiff did not meet the burden of proof of showing that her HIV status motivated her termination, when the financial difficulties and restructuring of the company were clear.
In 2013, the appellant was found having sexual intercourse with the victim, who was 15 years old. The next day the victim told the court that she and the appellant had been in love since June 2011 and that they had a sexual relationship.
The petitioner and respondent cross-petitioned to dissolve their marriage on the grounds of cruelty and adultery. The petitioner husband argued that he should have been granted custody of the couple’s 10-year-old daughter since the respondent wife treated him with cruelty on multiple occasions by exposing him naked in public and depriving him of his conjugal rights while alleging that he was HIV positive and demanding that he get tested. The petitioner additionally alleged that the respondent deserted the matrimonial home for no good reason and took marital property with her.
The landmark case stating that a married woman may, during the course of her marriage, acquire property independent of her husband. As long as the wife carries the burden of proof of showing that the property was purchased or received independently, she may own any property independent of her husband during the marriage, and will continue to own it independently after a divorce. The plaintiff was the daughter of the deceased and the defendant was the husband of the deceased. The deceased and the defendant had children, who were in the custody of the plaintiff.
This divorce case by the High Court centered on the plaintiff being abandoned by her husband, the defendant, after being diagnosed with HIV. The defendant removed all property from their house and refused to pay maintenance. The High Court found the defendant still had the responsibility to pay maintenance, and had to pay her for the equal value of the division of their marital property after their divorce, with her HIV status not limiting her legal rights to the property in any way.
The executive branch of Malawi issued a moratorium to halt the operation of laws that criminalized the sexual practices of same-sex couples. A lower court suspended the moratorium and three separate applicants filed for a continuation of the suspension in the High Court. The Court found that two of the applicants, as clergymen, did not have standing in the case because they were not directly injured by the moratorium.
