Re Otieno, 15 May 1987.
The conflict in this case was over who had the right to bury a deceased lawyer, his widow, or his clan.  The widow wanted to bury him at their family home near Nairobi, noting that the couple had been married under the British-imported Marriage Act and claiming that they were cosmopolitan and rejected custom; whereas the clan wanted to bury him in the land of its ancestors near Lake Victoria, arguing that customary law should prevail. After several appeals, the Court of Appeal held that no written or common law applied to the case and thus that customary law should be applied.  In particular, it found that a wife had no right to bury her husband under British common law.  It also rejected a claim of sex discrimination and ruled that burial was an exception to any anti-discrimination clause contained in the Kenya Constitution.
D000349:Africa; D017954:Africa South of the Sahara; D000351:Africa, Eastern; D003906:Developing Countries; D004467:Economics; D016656:Family Planning Policy; D007603:Jurisprudence; D007630:Kenya; D017533:Marital Status; D008393:Marriage; D011287:Prejudice; D011640:Public Policy; D012940:Social Problems; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D017805:Widowhood; D014933:Women's Rights
Africa; Africa South Of The Sahara; Court Decision; Developing Countries; Eastern Africa; Economic Factors; English Speaking Africa; Family Policy; Kenya; Marital Status; Nuptiality; Policy; Sex Discrimination--legal aspects; Social Discrimination; Social Policy; Social Problems; Socioeconomic Factors; Widowed--legal aspects; Women's Status--legal aspects