15/06/2026
ABOUT CLAIMING DAMAGES FOR ADULTERY
Mary Kampamba Chanda and Linus Chanda got married in 1994 and had three children. However, as early as 1997, Linus fathered a child outside the marriage with another woman. In 2003, he entered into a serious relationship with another woman, Catherine Nachila Sichela. At that point, he began living in two households and had a child with Catherine.
In 2011, Catherine died, and Linus later started a new relationship with yet another woman, Bridget Siamasiku, with whom he also had a child. At one point, Linus wrote a letter to Mary stating that he was not happy in the marriage and wanted a separation so that he could live a happy life, as he could no longer make her happy.
On the basis of the foregoing, Mary petitioned for divorce. She also sued Bridget for damages for adultery. Linus did not oppose the divorce petition and did not object to the dissolution of the marriage.
However, the claim for damages for adultery against Bridget was opposed. Bridget and Linus argued that by the time Linus began dating Bridget, the marriage between Mary and Linus was already strained, as the couple was no longer living together and Linus had committed adultery with other women, which Mary was aware of.
They further contended that the relationship between Linus and Bridget did not significantly injure Mary’s feelings, as the marriage had already been affected by Linus’s previous affairs. They added that Mary and Linus had not engaged in sexual in*******se for some time before Linus became involved with Bridget, which further showed that the marriage was already unhappy.
Bridget and Linus argued that Mary did not suffer significant financial loss or loss of companionship because the marriage had already broken down by the time Linus became involved with Bridget.
They maintained that any harm to her feelings was minimal, given that Linus had previously been involved with other women and Mary knew about it.
The High Court dismissed Mary’s claim for damages. The Court held that although the law allows a spouse to claim damages against a third party for adultery, such damages are compensatory and not punitive, meaning they must be based on actual loss suffered.
The Court found that the marriage between Mary and Linus had already broken down long before Linus began his relationship with Bridget. It noted that Linus had been involved with several other women during the marriage and that the couple had not been intimate for years.
The Court reasoned that, in those circumstances, the relationship between Linus and Bridget did not significantly worsen the situation, as the marriage was already strained and dysfunctional.
The Court emphasized that a party claiming damages must prove actual loss, such as financial loss or injury to feelings. In this case, Mary did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that she had suffered compensable loss as a result of the relationship between Linus and Bridget.
This case highlights that while the law permits claims for damages arising from adultery, such claims will only succeed where the claimant proves actual loss. Where a marriage is already broken down and the claimant cannot show tangible harm caused by the third party, the Court may refuse to award damages.
Case Citation: Chanda v Chanda and Another (HP 119 of 2012) [2015] ZMHC 543 (29 June 2015)
George Nkhuwa
