16/12/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Access to justice section 34, Attorney and client costs, Bona fide defence, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Contempt of court maintenance, Contumacious conduct, Costs, Discovery, Divorce, Duty to court, Good cause rescission, Hostile Family Lawyers, Inherent powers of court, Legal practitioner complicity, legal practitioner ethical duties, LPC Code of Conduct, Matrimonial proceedings discovery, Muslim Marriages, Procedural Law, Procedural non-compliance, Procedure, Punitive costs orders, Rescission of default judgment, Rule 35(1) discovery, Rule 35(3) notice, Rule 35(7), Section 173 Constitution, Serial contempt, Stalingrad tactics, Striking out defence, Uniform Form Rules of Court, Vexatious Litigant, Vexatious litigation, Vindicating court authority abuse of court process, Attorney and Client Costs, bona fide defence, chamber book applications, contempt of court, contumacious conduct, discovery obligations, divorce action, duty to court, family law litigation, good cause rescission, inherent powers of court, legal practitioner complicity, legal practitioner ethical duties, LPC Code of Conduct, maintenance claims, procedural non-compliance, punitive costs orders, rescission of default judgment, Rule 35(3) notice, Rule 35(7), section 173 Constitution, section 60.1, section 60.2, serial contempt, Stalingrad tactics, striking out defence, vindicating court authority, wilful default When the Court Draws a Line in the Sand: Striking Out for Serial Contempt and Abuse of Process in S.L v A.C (8030/2021) [2025] ZAWCHC 565 (4 December 2025). Introduction The case of S.L v A.C (8030/2021) ZAWCHC 565 (4 December 2025) serves as a stark reminder that access to justice does not mean access to courts on one's… READ MORE
13/12/2025 Bertus Preller Adult Children, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Arrear Maintenance Variation, Child Maintenance, Children, Contempt of court maintenance, Costs, Divorce order interpretation, Locus standi adult dependent children, Maintenance, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Major children maintenance rights, Natural guardianship termination, Parent standing enforcement, Post-divorce maintenance enforcement, Procedural Law, Punitive Cost Orders, Section 6(3) Divorce Act, Self-supporting children definition, Settlement agreement drafting adult dependents tertiary education, ancillary maintenance orders, arrear maintenance claims, Bannatyne contempt proceedings, best interests child section 28(2), Bursey common law duty support, civil claim reimbursement, contempt of court maintenance, divorce order interpretation, divorce settlement clauses, Endumeni interpretation principles, family law practitioners, locus standi adult dependent children, Maintenance Act enforcement, maintenance order enforcement, major children maintenance rights, natural guardianship termination, parent standing enforcement, payment recipient designation, PL v YL settlement agreements, post-divorce maintenance enforcement, primary caregiver designation, section 6(3) Divorce Act, section 8 Divorce Act variation, self-supporting children definition, settlement agreement drafting, Western Cape Full Court, Z v Z distinction Parents Stripped of Enforcement Rights for Adult Children’s Maintenance Post-Divorce: A Critical Analysis of R.L v J.F.D.L (A128/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 585 (12 December 2025). The Facts: Post-Divorce Enforcement of Maintenance for Adult Dependent Children The appellant and respondent were married in community of property for thirty years before divorcing in the High Court on… READ MORE
09/12/2025 Bertus Preller Alimony, Biometric evidence, Circumstantial evidence cohabitation, Cohabitation, Consortium omnis vitae, Dispensing with spousal consent, Drummond v Drummond, Dum casta clause, Fictional fulfilment doctrine, Living under same roof, Maintenance, Maintenance termination, Pacta sunt servanda, Permanent relationship, Post-divorce maintenance, Sexual intimacy cohabitation, Spousal Maintenance biometric evidence, Bwanya v Master, CB v HB, circumstantial evidence cohabitation, cohabitation as though married, consortium omnis vitae, constitutional challenge dum casta, de facto maintenance contributions, divorce settlement agreement, Dolamo J judgment, Drummond v Drummond, dum casta clause, family law South Africa, fictional fulfilment doctrine, Grobbelaar v Havenga, joint household, living under same roof, maintenance obligations, maintenance repayment, maintenance termination, Pacta Sunt Servanda, permanent relationship, public policy contracts, resolutive condition, RJS v LAS 2025, sexual intimacy cohabitation, Val De Vie estate, Western Cape High Court When Biometric Evidence Proves Cohabitation: RJS v LAS (Case No. 5486/2022) [2025] ZAWCHC (2 December 2025) – A Dum Casta Judgment on Post-Divorce Maintenance Termination. Background Facts: A Tale of Two Estates in Paarl The marriage between RJS and LAS was dissolved by decree of divorce granted by the Western Cape Division of the High… READ MORE
08/12/2025 Bertus Preller Accrual system, Clean Break Principle, Cohabitation, Costs, Direct financial contributions, Division of Estate, Divorce, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, EB v ER Constitutional Court, Equitable redistribution, Marriage, Marriage equality, matrimonial asset division, Out of community of property, Procedure, Punitive Cost Orders, Redistribution Claim, Rehabilitative maintenance, Section 7(2) maintenance, Section 7(3) Divorce Act, Section 7(4) contributions, Universal Partnership accrual system, antenuptial contract without accrual, Attorney and Client Costs, Beaumont v Beaumont, clean break principle, cohabitation before marriage, direct financial contributions, domestic partnership, EB v ER Constitutional Court, equitable redistribution, estate valuation disputes, family law redistribution, full court binding precedent, household duties, indirect contributions to estate, matrimonial asset division, Matrimonial Property Regime, out of community of property, Ponelat v Schrephfer, post-separation conduct, redistribution claims, rehabilitative maintenance, section 7(2) maintenance, section 7(3) Divorce Act, section 7(4) contributions, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, trust asset disclosure, universal partnership Beyond Marriage: 30 Years, 40% Redistribution and the Universal Partnership Principle – E.L.M v L.M (9360/2022P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 127 (5 December 2025). Facts and Matrimonial Background: A 30-Year Relationship The parties in this matter were married out of community of property without the accrual system on 27 March 1999, following a six-year… READ MORE
22/11/2025 Bertus Preller Balance of probabilities, Children, Court-ordered DNA testing, DNA evidence admissibility, DNA testing, Documentary evidence principles, Expert evidence requirements, Genetic testing reliability, Paternity confirmation, Paternity Disputes, Paternity Fraud, Paternity presumptions, Probative value of documents, SANAS guidelines, Scientific certainty standards authenticity of documents, balance of probabilities, buttressing oral evidence, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Civil Proceedings Evidence Act 25 of 1965, contemporaneous documentary evidence, court-ordered DNA testing, cross-examination requirements, cumulative evidence assessment, DNA evidence admissibility, documentary evidence principles, evidence law principles, expert evidence requirements, expert opinion evidence, family law South Africa, genetic testing reliability, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, maintenance court proceedings, maintenance enquiries, Mayer v Williams, paternity disputes, paternity presumptions, prima facie evidence, probative value of documents, SANAS guidelines, scientific certainty standards, unrepresented litigants, viva voce testimony, Western Cape High Court When DNA Evidence Speaks Without Experts: Probabilities, Paternity and Documentary Evidence in E.A.P v S.W (A115/2025) [2025] ZAWCHC 540 (20 November 2025). Factual Background: A Protracted Paternity Dispute Spanning Two Decades This appeal concerned a finding by the Cape Town Magistrate's Court, sitting as a maintenance court, that the appellant was the… READ MORE
22/11/2025 Bertus Preller Animus manendi, Clearly foreseen contingency, Contingencies domicile, Divorce, Divorce jurisdiction, Divorce proceedings jurisdiction, Domicile, Domicile Act 3 of 1992, Domicile of choice, Domicile of origin, Foreseeable contingency, Indefinite period, Intention to settle indefinitely, International relocation, Pollak test, Procedure, Reasonably anticipated contingency, Section 1(2) Domicile Act, Section 2(1)(a) Divorce Act 70 of 1979, Special plea in abatement, Vague possibility animus manendi, Chinatex v Erskine, clearly foreseen contingency, contingencies domicile, divorce jurisdiction, Domicile Act 3 of 1992, domicile of choice, domicile of origin, Eilon v Eilon, Family Law, foreseeable contingency, indefinite period, intention to settle indefinitely, International Relocation, IRC v Bullock, marital breakdown, matrimonial jurisdiction, OB v LBDS, onus of proof domicile, Pollak test, Re Fuld, reasonably anticipated contingency, section 1(2) Domicile Act, section 2(1)(a) Divorce Act 70 of 1979, special plea in abatement, trial period, vague possibility, Western Cape High Court When a “Trial Period” Defeats Domicile: Animus Manendi and Foreseeable Contingencies in M.S.S v R.A (2025/0539959) [2025] ZAWCHC 517 (10 November 2025). The Facts: From Cape Town to the Netherlands and Back Again The plaintiff and defendant met in the Western Cape in 2016. Their relationship progressed quickly, with the couple moving… READ MORE
21/11/2025 Bertus Preller 15(2)(a) matrimonial property act, Abuse, Actio communi dividundo, Alienation of immovable property, Dispensing with spousal consent, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence, In Community of Property, Matrimonial Properties Act, Plascon Evans Rule, Section 16(1) actio communi dividundo, alienation of immovable property, bona fide dispute of fact, bound co-ownership, credit agreements joint estate, dispensing with spousal consent, evidentiary burden motion proceedings, family law property disputes, free co-ownership, good cause to dispense with consent, joint estate, joint estate property sale, marriage in community of property, matrimonial property disputes, MEPF case, national credit act section 129, Plascon-Evans principles, prejudice to joint estate, private sale vs execution sale, reinstatement of credit agreement, Rule 46A, sale in execution, section 15(2)(a) matrimonial property act, section 15(2)(f) matrimonial property act, section 16(1) matrimonial property act, spousal consent requirements, unreasonable withholding of consent, withholding consent unreasonably Breaking the Deadlock: When Courts Override a Spouse’s Refusal to Sell Joint Estate Property – J.G.S v S.E.S and Others (A283/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 543 (21 November 2025). Introduction The Western Cape High Court's decision in J.G.S v S.E.S and Others (A283/2024) ZAWCHC 543 addresses a question of considerable practical importance in South African family law: when may… READ MORE
08/11/2025 Bertus Preller Abducting parent defences, Article 13 defences, Article 13(a) consent, Article 13(b) grave risk, Habitual Residence, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Left-behind parent rights, Prompt return of child, Wrongful removal of child abducting parent defences, ancillary relief, Article 13 defences, Article 13(a) consent, Article 13(b) grave risk, Central Authority South Africa, child return application, Convention proceedings, curator ad litem, custody proceedings, Denmark child abduction, family law South Africa, grave risk threshold, habitual residence, Hague Convention, International Child Abduction, intolerable situation, jurisdictional issues, Koch case, left-behind parent rights, Mirror Orders, N M v Central Authority, Plascon-Evans rule, prompt return of child, Protective Measures, Sonderup v Tondelli, summary proceedings, two-stage process, wrongful removal of child When Midnight Departures Belie Consent: Article 13 Defences Fail in International Child Abduction Case – Central Authority of the Republic of South Africa and Another v L (2025-178969) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1101 (3 November 2025). Factual Matrix: A Mother's Contested Departure from Denmark to South Africa The dispute before Adams J in the Gauteng Division of the High Court centred on a six-year-old boy who… READ MORE
01/11/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Conduct of Childcare Experts, Interlocutory applications, Motion proceedings, Parental Alienation, Parental Rights, Plascon Evans Rule, Procedural Law, Procedure, Referral to trial, Rule 6(5)(g), Sexual Abuse, Sexual Abuse Allegations abuse of process, child contact disputes, Children's Best Interests, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, coaching of child, court as upper guardian, credibility assessment, custody and access, Dispute of Fact, expert evidence family law, expert witness requirements, family advocate report, forensic psychologist report, interlocutory applications, judicial investigation children, motion proceedings, onus of proof family law, Parental Rights, Plascon-Evans rule, referral to trial, room hire principle, Rule 6(5)(g), section 28 best interests, sexual abuse allegations, shared parenting arrangements, South African Family Law, supervised contact, suspension of contact rights, unsubstantiated allegations Unproven Abuse Allegations and Expert Evidence: When Courts Reject Referral to Trial in Child Contact Disputes – C.N v I.G.R (D6383/2024) [2025] ZAKZDHC 68 (28 October 2025). The Factual Matrix: Allegations of Sexual Abuse and Protracted Litigation The case of C.N v I.G.R (D6383/2024) ZAKZDHC 68 (28 October 2025) presents a troubling factual scenario that will resonate… READ MORE
26/10/2025 Bertus Preller Accrual claims, Divorce, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, Member spouse, Non-member spouse, Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956, Pension interest, Procedural Law, Procedure, Referee report, Retirement fund divorce, Section 37D, Settlement agreements, Tax liability pension interest accrual claims, accrual system, C.N.N v N.N, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, divorce settlement agreement, divorce trial court, legislative lacuna pension law, matrimonial property, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, member spouse, motion court jurisdiction, Ndaba v Ndaba, non-member spouse, Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956, pension funds legislation, pension interest, pension sharing divorce, referee report, retirement benefits divorce, retirement fund divorce, Reynolds v Reynolds, section 3 Matrimonial Property Act, section 37D, section 7(8), South African Family Law, T.M.W v J.J.W, tax liability pension interest, withdrawal benefits tax, ZAGPPHC 1093 2025 When Retirement Funds Cannot Settle Accrual Claims: D E C B v J M B (37464-2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1093 (21 October 2025) and the Jurisdictional Dilemma in South African Divorce Law. Factual Matrix: When a Referee's Report Reveals More Questions Than Answers The parties in this matter were married out of community of property with the application of the accrual system… READ MORE