Substantive equality for women in distribution of matrimonial property: Uganda’s contribution-based approach

Abstract This article explores the potential for a contribution-based approach to the division of matrimonial property by drawing on Uganda’s approach. Uganda lacks a legislative framework for dividing matrimonial property upon divorce, leaving courts with the discretion to determine distribution. In the 2022 Court of Appeal decision in Ambayo v Aserua, the Court established several key principles: marriage does not guarantee an automatic half-share in matrimonial property; a spouse’s share depends on their contribution; homemakers' contributions should be valued based on comparable market services; and contributions towards a spouse’s education during marriage should be deducted from the beneficiary spouse’s total claim. This decision requires parties to demonstrate the extent of their contributions to matrimonial property. However, the historical undervaluation of homemaking and the difficulty in proving such contributions raise concerns about the protection of homemakers, often women, in property distribution upon divorce. This article examines key rulings in Ambayo to assess the potential for achieving substantive equality for women under this regime. The unique contribution of this article is its use of the Ambayo rulings to develop strategies that leverage a contribution-based approach to promote substantive equality while also highlighting limitations. It concludes that while Uganda’s contribution-based approach shows promise for achieving substantive equality, several obstacles persist. These include the lack of tangible proof for certain homemaking roles, the low market value assigned to care and domestic work, and the difficulties in valuing unquantifiable aspects of care and domestic tasks.