Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Williams V. Williams (1987) CLR 4(b) (SC)

Judgement delivered on April 3rd 1987

Brief

  • Custody order
  • Family law
  • Martrimonal causes act

Facts

The parties were married at Wood green Marriage Registry, London on 30/3/63. After the marriage, the parties cohabited at diverse place both in London and Lagos including 16B Airport Road, Ikeja. Following the breaking of the marriage, the parties have living apart since 1st October, a period of over 6 years preceding the presentation of the petition. This period of separation started on 1st October, 1975 when the appellant left the matrimonial home. The separation created problems for the respondent and according to his testimony

  • “since she left and there were no boarding schools in Lagos, I decided to educate the children in England. Consequently, the first two boys were taken to Abbey Junior School in Kent in England where they were till 1980 before they left for king’s school (for the elders) and for the younger, king’s junior school, Canterbury, Kent in England …..The two boys have always been with me for the greater part of the time. The other part they spent abroad ……..I have a lady friend of the family who comes in to look after them while they are here.”

The appellant left with the only daughter of the family, Kafilat Abimbola Williams. Since she left, the respondent has not set his eyes on her. All the effort made by the respondent yielded no results.

The short point in this appeal relates to the proper order to make in respect of the custody of one of the children of the marriage between the parties to this appeal that has been dissolved by decree nisi made by the court of trial. The decree nisi has since been made absolute. The name of the child in question is Kafilat Abimbola Williams (male). There was no contest about the custody of Rasheed Ayodele Williams and Hakeem Akintola Williams

Oladikpo Williams J. who heard and determined the petition granted custody of the child to the appellant. This was after hearing evidence from the respondent. The appellant did not testify in support of her application for custody and did not appear at the hearing of the petition. The Court of Appeal to which the respondent took the matter on appeal, by a majority of two to one, reversed the decision of Oladipo Williams J. and granted to the respondent.

The appellant being dissatisfied appealed to the Supreme Court

Issues

  • 1
    What principles should a court consider in deciding which of two...
  • Read More