Nimezaa na mke wa mtu bila kufahamu. Je, naweza kumchukua mtoto?
Nimezaa na mke wa mtu bila kufahamu. Je, naweza kumchukua mtoto?
- Thread starter Ziltan
- Start date
Ziltan
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 20, 2011
- 2,672
- 6,880
- Thread starter
- #42
yye anajisiakiaje mm kupoteza damu yangu,
na mtt kutomfaham babaake wa kwel?
kwnz sasa hivi ni kama ilishavunjika ,kuna wkt alinillamikia kuwa hajapewa mambo miez Saba, yaan mme wake alikuwa akifika kwake haisimam,
ndoa ntamuoa, au ataolew pengine.
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
na mtt kutomfaham babaake wa kwel?
kwnz sasa hivi ni kama ilishavunjika ,kuna wkt alinillamikia kuwa hajapewa mambo miez Saba, yaan mme wake alikuwa akifika kwake haisimam,
ndoa ntamuoa, au ataolew pengine.
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
Zakayo Laban
Member
- Jan 21, 2020
- 25
- 11
Kwani kipindi uko na huyo mwanamke asiyejitambua mume wake alikua safari ya mbali kwa miaka mingapi na kama alikuwepo unahakika gani kuwa mtoto ni wako? We jichanganye utakosa kuishuhudia treni ya umeme
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
BenKaile
JF-Expert Member
- Oct 17, 2014
- 443
- 375
Kwanza umetembea na mke wa mtu, hilo ni kosa kwa wote wa wawili kitamaduni na kisheria.
Pili, umezaa na mkewa tuhilo ni kosa la kimaadili, tamaduni na kisheria.
Tatu, unatafuta uhalaliwa mtoto aliyezaliwa nje ya ndoa ya mke wa mtu, hilo ni pingamizi kisheria.
Nne, menaendeleza uhusiano na mazoea na mke wa mtu juu ya yote yaliyotokea bila kujali uharamu wa matendo mliyofanya na mwanamke wa ndoa ya mtu mwingine,
hiki ni kielelezo zaidi cha kujiingiza kwenye hatari kubwa kutokana na makosa mliyotangulia kufanya awali.
Tano,
Pili, umezaa na mkewa tuhilo ni kosa la kimaadili, tamaduni na kisheria.
Tatu, unatafuta uhalaliwa mtoto aliyezaliwa nje ya ndoa ya mke wa mtu, hilo ni pingamizi kisheria.
Nne, menaendeleza uhusiano na mazoea na mke wa mtu juu ya yote yaliyotokea bila kujali uharamu wa matendo mliyofanya na mwanamke wa ndoa ya mtu mwingine,
hiki ni kielelezo zaidi cha kujiingiza kwenye hatari kubwa kutokana na makosa mliyotangulia kufanya awali.
Tano,
MR LINKO
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 20, 2016
- 3,034
- 3,526
Ziltan
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 20, 2011
- 2,672
- 6,880
- Thread starter
- #49
la kuongeza ni kwamba huyu mtt alisumbua San utoton,
na kusababisha mamaake kunitafta bila kutaka na hivyo suluhisho kupatkan,
hasa ikihusisha mambo ya kiiman,
kama kulilia jina,
nk.
binafsi nahic mtt alinijulish alipo nami jukum langu ni kumfatilia nikamtoe huko alipo na kumuweka sehem sahh.
vp jaman,
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
na kusababisha mamaake kunitafta bila kutaka na hivyo suluhisho kupatkan,
hasa ikihusisha mambo ya kiiman,
kama kulilia jina,
nk.
binafsi nahic mtt alinijulish alipo nami jukum langu ni kumfatilia nikamtoe huko alipo na kumuweka sehem sahh.
vp jaman,
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
permanides
JF-Expert Member
- May 18, 2013
- 11,682
- 14,241
ALPHRED MAHUNJA
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 30, 2013
- 308
- 160
Habari wanajamiiforums. Leo Katika kutembelea forum hii nikavutiwa na hii mada.
SHERIA HAIKO WAZI SANA ILA KUNA DHANA INAYOSEMA MTENDA UOVU HAPEWI HAKI YA KUFAIDIKA KUTOKANA NA UOVU ALIOUTENDA .PIA KUNA KESI ZIMESHAWAHI KUAMULIWA INGAWA SI KAMA YAKO ILAZINAENDANA.
(ii) The court will not assist a claimant to recover a benefit from his own wrongdoing. This extends to claims for compensation or an indemnity in respect of the adverse consequences of the wrongdoing - see Beresford v Royal Insurance Co Ltd [1938] AC 586.
Hii pia
Facts
In Riggs , a probate suit, the plaintiffs, Mrs. Riggs and Mrs. Preston, sought to invalidate the will of their father Francis B. Palmer; testated on August 13, 1880. The defendant in the case was Elmer E. Palmer, grandson to the testator. The will gave small legacies to two of the daughters, Mrs. Preston and Mrs. Riggs, and the bulk of the estate to Elmer Palmer to be cared for by his mother, Susan Palmer, the widow of a dead son of the testator, until he became of legal age.
Knowing that he was to be the recipient of his grandfather's large estate, Elmer, fearing that his grandfather might change the will, murdered his grandfather by poisoning him. The plaintiffs argued that by allowing the will to be executed Elmer would be profiting from his crime. While a criminal law existed to punish Elmer for the murder, there was no statute under either probate or criminal law that invalidated his claim to the estate based on his role in the murder.
Significance
Legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin uses Riggs in an argument against legal positivism , focusing on a version of positivism by H. L. A. Hart . As a leader of the philosophy of Legal Positivism, Hart argues that the decisions in this case should be based on existing law, which was silent on the issue at the time. Positivism holds that all legal decisions by courts are classified into one of two categories. Some are central to the legal rules at issue. In these cases, judges merely mechanically apply the rules which fall within their jurisdiction. The other category of decisions occupy the penumbra of legal rules, where the direction of the legal rule is unclear. In these cases, judges must decide which of the possible applications of the legal rules are best social policy and then apply the rule which is best.
[1]Dworkin argues that Riggs has two features which contradict Hart's interpretation of the legal process. First, this case does not appear to lie at the edge of legal rules, instead it is very clearly central. Despite this, the majority did not apply the legal rule as required. Second, there appears to be a legitimate debate about what the law is , and not what the law should be , in this case. According to Dworkin, under most versions of legal positivism, Hart's included, there should rarely be debate about what counts as law.
[2]In Taking Rights Seriously , Dworkin argues that this case shows that in addition to rules established in statutes, principles are also a component of law. These principles, while not binding in the same manner the rules can be, are sufficient to modify statutes as in Riggs . He argues that both the majority and the dissent use these legal principles -- "one cannot benefit from one's own wrongdoing" in the case of the majority and "one should not be punished beyond the ways specified in the statute" in the case of the dissent.
[3]In Nepal, this case was referred by the plaintiff lawyers against Renu Dahal for tearing ballot papers.
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
SHERIA HAIKO WAZI SANA ILA KUNA DHANA INAYOSEMA MTENDA UOVU HAPEWI HAKI YA KUFAIDIKA KUTOKANA NA UOVU ALIOUTENDA .PIA KUNA KESI ZIMESHAWAHI KUAMULIWA INGAWA SI KAMA YAKO ILAZINAENDANA.
(ii) The court will not assist a claimant to recover a benefit from his own wrongdoing. This extends to claims for compensation or an indemnity in respect of the adverse consequences of the wrongdoing - see Beresford v Royal Insurance Co Ltd [1938] AC 586.
Hii pia
Facts
In Riggs , a probate suit, the plaintiffs, Mrs. Riggs and Mrs. Preston, sought to invalidate the will of their father Francis B. Palmer; testated on August 13, 1880. The defendant in the case was Elmer E. Palmer, grandson to the testator. The will gave small legacies to two of the daughters, Mrs. Preston and Mrs. Riggs, and the bulk of the estate to Elmer Palmer to be cared for by his mother, Susan Palmer, the widow of a dead son of the testator, until he became of legal age.
Knowing that he was to be the recipient of his grandfather's large estate, Elmer, fearing that his grandfather might change the will, murdered his grandfather by poisoning him. The plaintiffs argued that by allowing the will to be executed Elmer would be profiting from his crime. While a criminal law existed to punish Elmer for the murder, there was no statute under either probate or criminal law that invalidated his claim to the estate based on his role in the murder.
Significance
Legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin uses Riggs in an argument against legal positivism , focusing on a version of positivism by H. L. A. Hart . As a leader of the philosophy of Legal Positivism, Hart argues that the decisions in this case should be based on existing law, which was silent on the issue at the time. Positivism holds that all legal decisions by courts are classified into one of two categories. Some are central to the legal rules at issue. In these cases, judges merely mechanically apply the rules which fall within their jurisdiction. The other category of decisions occupy the penumbra of legal rules, where the direction of the legal rule is unclear. In these cases, judges must decide which of the possible applications of the legal rules are best social policy and then apply the rule which is best.
[1]Dworkin argues that Riggs has two features which contradict Hart's interpretation of the legal process. First, this case does not appear to lie at the edge of legal rules, instead it is very clearly central. Despite this, the majority did not apply the legal rule as required. Second, there appears to be a legitimate debate about what the law is , and not what the law should be , in this case. According to Dworkin, under most versions of legal positivism, Hart's included, there should rarely be debate about what counts as law.
[2]In Taking Rights Seriously , Dworkin argues that this case shows that in addition to rules established in statutes, principles are also a component of law. These principles, while not binding in the same manner the rules can be, are sufficient to modify statutes as in Riggs . He argues that both the majority and the dissent use these legal principles -- "one cannot benefit from one's own wrongdoing" in the case of the majority and "one should not be punished beyond the ways specified in the statute" in the case of the dissent.
[3]In Nepal, this case was referred by the plaintiff lawyers against Renu Dahal for tearing ballot papers.
Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
jathurwa
JF-Expert Member
- Dec 13, 2019
- 214
- 260
Nadhani huu uzi ni wa siku nyingi kidogo ila si vyema kutokutoa maoni. Ni hivi; Kwanza weye ni mtu mmoja muovu sana. Ulimghilibu mke wa mtu hadi akakuonjesha kidogo tu.
Sasa shukrani zako ni kutaka aikose nyumba yake na familia yake kwa sababu ya huruma zake kwako weye omba omba? Mwache mke wa mtu na usiendelee kumkodolea mimacho hadi ajisahau akuhurumie tena.
Pili; Yaelekea huna uwezo wa kuwa baba bado. Tulia kabisa halafu tafuta mdada mzuri asiye na mtu halafu umuoe awe wako kabisa ndipo umzalishe mtoto awe mwanao halali.
Ukiendelea kumendea vya watu utaishia pabaya. Mwanamume hata awe mdogo kama piritoni nakuhakikishia katika kutetea mke hatishwi na misuli wala vifua. Atakutoa roho hata kwa kukuloga ufweee
Sasa shukrani zako ni kutaka aikose nyumba yake na familia yake kwa sababu ya huruma zake kwako weye omba omba? Mwache mke wa mtu na usiendelee kumkodolea mimacho hadi ajisahau akuhurumie tena.
Pili; Yaelekea huna uwezo wa kuwa baba bado. Tulia kabisa halafu tafuta mdada mzuri asiye na mtu halafu umuoe awe wako kabisa ndipo umzalishe mtoto awe mwanao halali.
Ukiendelea kumendea vya watu utaishia pabaya. Mwanamume hata awe mdogo kama piritoni nakuhakikishia katika kutetea mke hatishwi na misuli wala vifua. Atakutoa roho hata kwa kukuloga ufweee
Masokotz
JF-Expert Member
- Nov 26, 2018
- 3,713
- 6,121
Hakuna sheria inayokupa haki ya kuwa baba wa mtoto.Hauna haki ya kupima vinasaba wala haki ya kumdai mtoto.Je unataka mtoto na mama yake au mtoto tu.
Je, umejuaje kuwa ni mke wa mtu. Cha kufanya wewe tafuta mke wako umuoe uyo mtoto kama ni wako utampata tu. Believe me mama yake atamwamabia ukifika wakati sahihi.
Do not be selfish.
Je, umejuaje kuwa ni mke wa mtu. Cha kufanya wewe tafuta mke wako umuoe uyo mtoto kama ni wako utampata tu. Believe me mama yake atamwamabia ukifika wakati sahihi.
Do not be selfish.
Mangungo II
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 6, 2012
- 18,133
- 26,766
BUSH BIN LADEN
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 16, 2019
- 8,447
- 19,425
Hivi hii ya mtoto kulilia jina hua ni kweli?
By the way tupe mrejesho nini kiliendelea maana naona humu ulipewa za uso za kutosha, yaani pamoja na JF kuwa na wehu mara moja moja kwa hili hamna alieko upande wako..
Samson Ngomboli
JF-Expert Member
- Oct 30, 2019
- 1,598
- 2,710
Unaonekana kumdharau mwenye mke,ila wengi wamekuonya Kwa maisha yako,mke na mtoto,ukishupaza shingo ni wewe lakini usisahau kumpa ujumbe mwanafamilia mmojawapo aje aage kwa niaba yako ili account yako iandikwe R.I.P
