MOHAMMED WAHIB HUZAIFEH

The following judgments were delivered :­FUAD, J.

This is an appeal from the judgment of Barton, J. who gave judgment in favour of plaintiff-respondent for the sum of £99 15s. and costs against defendants-appellants.

It is apparent from the pleadings filed in the case, that it was common ground between the parties who are Moslems of the Hanafi second formerly residents of Syria, that respondent was married in Syria to second appellant who is the daughter of first appellant according to Mohammedan Law; that the marriage ~as not consummated; that respondent came out to the Gold Coast followed by the first appellant and later by the second appellant and that attempts made to bring respondent and second appellant together as husband and wife proved abortive.

It was upon this failure that first appellant accompanied by two witnesses and supported by Imam Mohammed Abass, appeared before the District Commissioner of Accra, on the 18th of June, 1938 and declared that a divorce had taken place between second appellant and respondent on the 6th of June, 1938. It i3 in evidence that on the 17th of July, 1938, second appellant married one Abdo Sabeh of Accra.

On 23rd of July 1938, respondent instituted these proceedings against the appellants claiming £200 damages" for the defendants without the plaintiff's knowledge or consent obtaining certificate of divorce of the second defendant (daughter of the 1st defendant) from the plaintiff on the 6th of June, 1938 under the Mohammedan Marriage Ordinance whereby the second defendant has refused to complete her marriage with plaintiff contrary to a marriage contract entered into between plaintiff and defendants at Latakia, Syria, on the 6th of October, 1934."

Although the claim is vague and ambiguous yet it is clear from the pleadings and from the statements made by counsel on both sides on the day fixed for the hearing of the case that marriage between the parties was admitted and the only two issues they desired the Court to adjudicate Upon were (1) was there a valid divorce between the parties and (2) if not, is plaintiff entitled to damages and amount.

Upon this it became necessary to prove as facts the Mohammedans Law of marriage and divorce as practised by the Moslems of the Hanafi school with particular reference to any local law or custom peculiar to the inhabitants of Syria and the effect and consequence of such marriage by the law of Syria.

For this purpose a certain Alhaji Ahamadu Futah was called as an expe