Can Married Women Own Property Separately?

Can Married Women Own Property Separately?
By Dickson Jere

A man had entered into a contract with ZAMTEL for the provision of mobile telephone services to him in 2003. He provided his flat as his usual address of service. Years later, he married and his wife moved into the same flat and she came with her own household goods. During the marriage, he left Zambia for school in the UK. It appears before he got married, he did not settle the telephone bill which stood at over K16 million (unrebased).

In 2005, ZAMTEL sued for the unsettled bill. Since he was out of the country, the Court Process was left at the same flat. He did not enter appearance nor defence and therefore ZAMTEL obtained a Judgment by Default. The company thereafter proceeded to execute the judgment through the bailiffs who seized the household goods including those belonging to the wife.

She ‘sued’ ZAMTEL under the “Interpleader” Summons where she claimed her seized goods as they did not belong to her husband. In 2009, a Consent Order was settled in which ZAMTEL agreed to return the seized goods to her.

However, upon being given back her goods, she launched another case against ZAMTEL in which she claimed that the execution was unlawful and that she suffered mental anguish, embarrassment and loss of amenities.
In defence, ZAMTEL argued that they seized goods on the address that was given by her husband and it was difficult to ascertain properties that belonged to each person during execution.

The High Court ruled that the execution was lawful and the absence of the husband did not provide immunity from seizure of assets perceived to be his or family.

The matter reached the Court of Appeal and she argued that the Married Women’s Property Act of the UK, which applies to Zambia, allows married women to own property independently from their husbands.

“The Writ of Execution was properly issued and directed to the residential address of the judgment debtor,” a panel of three Judges opined.

“Where goods of a third person in possession of a judgment debtor are seized in execution of a judgment and the execution is regularly issued, then the seizure or execution cannot be said to be wrongful,” the Court said.

They opined that the lady should have claimed her damages in the earlier case when she was given back her goods rather than start a fresh action although High a court had given her permission to do so.

Case citation- Kasumpa Kabalata v ZAMTEL – Appeal No.72/2023 and Judgement delivered last month on 26th February, 2025.

I wish the Court of Appeal had canvassed more on the issue of independent ownership of property of married women in Zambia. Even though ZAMTEL agreed to return her goods, we should have developed this jurisprudence further for future guidance.