03/07/2026 Bertus Preller Contingencies domicile, Domicile, Domicile Act 3 of 1992, Domicile of choice, Domicile of origin, Lex domicilii matrimonii, matrimonial asset division, Section 1(2) Domicile Act antenuptial contract international, choice of law marriage, common law reform South Africa, constitutional invalidity common law, costs order against Minister of Justice, cross-border divorce South Africa, development of common law South Africa, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, Domicile Act 3 of 1992, EU Regulation 2016/1103, Frankel's Estate case, gender discrimination family law, Golden AJ judgment, habitual residence matrimonial property, Hague Convention matrimonial property regimes, husband's domicile rule, international marriages South Africa, L.E v L.A judgment, Lex Domicilii Matrimonii, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, matrimonial property law South Africa, private international law South Africa, proprietary consequences of marriage, retrospective declaration of invalidity, same-sex marriage property regime, section 9 equality Constitution, Sperling v Sperling, Western Cape High Court family law, ZAWCHC 343 Goodbye to the Husband’s Domicile: N.P. v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (2468/2024) [2026] ZAWCHC 343 (23 June 2026) Rewrites SA’s Matrimonial Property Conflict Rule. In N.P. v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (2468/2024) ZAWCHC 343 (23 June 2026), the Western Cape High Court declared the common law rule of lex domicilii… READ MORE
25/06/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Child Maintenance, Children, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Contempt of court maintenance, Divorce, Financial non-disclosure, Maintenance, Maintenance Court, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Non-disclosure consequences, Plascon Evans Rule, Post-divorce maintenance, Post-divorce maintenance enforcement, Spousal Maintenance, Uberrimae fidei matrimonial proceedings Arrear Maintenance, Attorney and Client Costs, beyond reasonable doubt, child maintenance, Civil Contempt, contempt of court, Contempt Proceedings, Davis AJ, Dezius v Dezius, Divorce Act, dolus eventualis, Eke v Parsons, evidential burden, Fakie v CCII Systems, family law South Africa, financial disclosure, full and frank disclosure, inability to pay defence, luxuries non-essentials, maintenance court variation, maintenance debtor, Maintenance Order, parental maintenance obligations, Pheko v Ekurhuleni, Plascon-Evans rule, poverty defence, settlement agreement order of court, Western Cape High Court, wilful and mala fide When “I Can’t Pay” Becomes Contempt: Luxuries, Maintenance Arrears and the Duty of Full Disclosure in D.W v J.L.K (12604/2015) [2026] ZAWCHC 322 (17 June 2026). D.W v J.L.K (12604/2015) ZAWCHC 322 (17 June 2026) The facts: a maintenance debtor who paid for luxuries before his children The applicant and respondent divorced in 2015. In terms… READ MORE
15/06/2026 Bertus Preller 1996 Hague Convention, Abducting parent defences, Abduction, Article 13 defences, Article 13(a) consent, Article 13(b) grave risk, Children, Children's Court, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction acquiescence, Ad Hoc Central Authority, ameliorative measures, Article 12, Article 13, Article 13(a), Article 13(b), Central Authority, Chapter 17, child abduction South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Cloete J, ex post facto consent, grave risk defence, habitual residence, Hague Convention, International Child Abduction, KG v GB, Koch case, Penello, Plascon-Evans, relocation application, return order, rights of custody, Smith v Smith, Sonderup v Tondelli, undertakings, Western Cape High Court, wrongful retention Real, Positive and Unequivocal: How Ad Hoc Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another v L.C.C (2026/034707) [2026] ZAWCHC 301 (10 June 2026) Tests Consent and Grave Risk Under the Hague Convention. This judgment is a useful working illustration of how our courts now approach return applications under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, incorporated into our… READ MORE
05/06/2026 Bertus Preller Abuse, Balance of probabilities, Domestic Violence, Emotional Abuse, Irreparable harm test, Physical Abuse, Psychological Abuse, Spoliation accrual system, balance of probabilities, civil remedies, divorce proceedings, domestic relationship, domestic violence, Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998, emotional abuse, evidence affidavit, family law South Africa, final protection order, Gauteng Division, harm threshold, High Court appeal, IKM v GRM, interdict, Interim Protection Order, magistrates court, matrimonial property, protection order, protection order misuse, psychological harm, Rule 43, section 1 DVA, section 6(4) DVA, spoliation, warrant of arrest, Wentzel J, Wilson J, ZAGPJHC 461 When Collecting Your Own Car Is Not Domestic Violence — IKM v GRM (A2025-156276) [2026] ZAGPJHC 461 (7 May 2026). The Facts: A Car, a Parking Lot, and a Protection Order The parties in IKM v GRM (A2025-156276) ZAGPJHC 461 (7 May 2026), decided by Wilson J (with whom Wentzel… READ MORE
31/05/2026 Bertus Preller Conflict of Interest, Eviction, In Community of Property, Joinder, Joinder of convenience, Locus Standi, LPC Code of Conduct, LPC Code of Conduct, PIE ACT, Plascon Evans Rule, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Section 17 Matrimonial Property Act, Spousal Eviction Absa Bank v Naude, clause 3.9 legal practitioners, conflict of interest attorney, customary marriage community of property, direct and substantial interest, dispute of fact motion proceedings, Gordon v Department of Health, joinder of convenience, joint estate litigation, locus standi eviction, LPC Code of Conduct, Matjhabeng Local Municipality, N.C.M.W v P.S.K, necessary joinder, oral evidence referral, person in charge PIE, PIE Act eviction, Plascon-Evans rule, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Room Hire Co, Rule 6(5)(g) referral, section 17 Matrimonial Property Act, spousal consent litigation, spousal joinder eviction, universal partnership co-ownership, unlawful occupier, Western Cape High Court eviction, Wightman v Headfour, ZAWCHC 272 Eviction by One Spouse, Joinder of the Other, and the Conflict Trap: Lessons from N.C.M.W v P.S.K and Others (2025/218300) [2026] ZAWCHC 272 (29 May 2026). A recent judgment of the Western Cape Division, N.C.M.W v P.S.K and Others (2025/218300) ZAWCHC 272 (29 May 2026), is a useful teaching case. On its face it is a… READ MORE
28/05/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Clean Break Principle, Divorce, Maintenance, Maintenance termination, Matrimonial Properties Act, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, Pension Funds, Post-divorce maintenance, Rehabilitative maintenance, Section 7(2) maintenance, Spousal Maintenance accrual system, Antenuptial Contract, clean break principle, conduct of parties, contribution towards costs, CPI escalation, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, divorce South Africa, duration of marriage, earning capacity, employability, Family Law, financial needs and obligations, GEPF, industrial psychologist, Maintenance Order, marital standard of living, matrimonial property, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, onus to prove need, pendente lite maintenance, pension interest, rehabilitative maintenance, retirement, Section 7(2), section 7(8), spousal maintenance, stay-at-home spouse, termination of maintenance When the Money Must Stop: Rehabilitative Maintenance and the Clean Break in M.I.B (born H[…]) v D.B (2023-079189) [2026] ZAGPPHC 411 (2 May 2026). M.I.B (born H) v D.B (2023-079189) ZAGPPHC 411 (2 May 2026) This judgment of Smit AJ in the Gauteng Division, Pretoria, is a useful working example of how a court… READ MORE
26/05/2026 Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Custody, Economic precarity, Family Advocate, Jurisdiction of convenience, Ordinary residence of child, Primary residence dispute, Psychological vulnerability, Relocation, Section 28 Constitution, Section 29 Children's Act, Unilateral relocation best interests of the child, BLFM v GJM, child relocation Eastern Cape, Contact rights, Coopers v Deutsche Gesellschaft, custody and care, economic precarity, expert evidence family law, Family Advocate recommendation, family law South Africa, FS v JJ, Gauteng Division Johannesburg, High Court jurisdiction children, JS v WF, judicial discretion best interests, jurisdiction of convenience, MV Pasquale Della Gatta, NAN v CN, ordinary residence of child, parental rights and responsibilities, primary residence dispute, psychological vulnerability, relocation dispute, section 20 Children's Act, section 21 Children's Act, section 28(2) Constitution, Section 29 Children's Act, SH v MLH, Wilson J judgment Jurisdiction Is Not a Border Post: Section 29 of the Children’s Act Reconsidered in H.M.M v D.M (2025/140422) [2026] ZAGPJHC 506 (19 May 2026). The Facts: A Relocation, an Expert Report, and a Jurisdictional Challenge The applicant, HMM, and the respondent, DM, were in a relationship for seven years and lived together for much… READ MORE
26/04/2026 Bertus Preller Animus contrahendi, qard, Appeal, Divorce, Enrichment, Faskh, Islamic Law, Islamic marriage, Muslim Marriages, Nafaqah, Nikah, Shariah law animus contrahendi, costs order, Dave v Birrell, delictual claim, Divorce Amendment Act 1 of 2024, Family Law, faskh, insurance excess, Islamic marriage, loan versus gift, magistrate's court appeal, Muslim Marriage, nafaqah, nikah, oral agreement, Pillay v Krishna, pleadings, qard, quantum, Shariah law, Shill v Milner, Sonap Petroleum, South African Law, spousal maintenance, tacit agreement, unjustified enrichment, waiver, Western Cape High Court, Women's Legal Centre Trust Loans, Gifts and Nafaqah: How the Western Cape High Court Rewrote the Financial Aftermath of an Islamic Marriage in Y.M v S.P (Appeal) (A146/2025) [2026] ZAWCHC 164 (13 April 2026). The facts: a brief nikah, a premature birth and a R154 118 claim In Y.M v S.P (Appeal) (A146/2025) ZAWCHC 164 (13 April 2026), the Western Cape High Court (Pangarker… READ MORE
25/04/2026 Bertus Preller Attorney and client costs, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, constitutional rights of children, Contempt of Court, Costs de bonis propriis, Family Advocate, Lawyer-client alignment, Punitive costs orders activist intervention family law, attorney professional conduct, attorney withdrawal, best interests of the child, child care and contact, child custody disputes, Constitution section 1(c), contempt of court, costs de bonis propriis, Court Order Compliance, Fakie contempt, Family Advocate, family law South Africa, High Court contempt proceedings, High Court parenting disputes, lay assistant family law, Legal Practice Council referral, M.N v J.E, parental responsibilities and rights, parenting litigation, Rule of Law, S v Beyer, social workers, suspended fine, suspended imprisonment, unauthorised legal assistance, Uniform Rule 16(4), urgent child return order, ZAWCHC 189 When Activism Crosses the Line: Contempt, Child Welfare and Attorney Accountability in M.N v J.E and Another (2025/221659) [2026] ZAWCHC 189 (20 April 2026). The Facts: A Child Removed from the Father’s Care, an Urgent Return Order, and the Contempt Sequel In M.N v J.E and Another (2025/221659) ZAWCHC 189 (20 April 2026), Pangarker… READ MORE
17/04/2026 Bertus Preller Alter ego trust, Attorney and client costs, Costs, Divorce, Insolvent spouse litigation, Out of community of property, Piercing the corporate veil, Procedural Law, Punitive Cost Orders, Punitive costs orders, Redistribution Claim, Rule 47 Uniform Rules of Court, Section 23(6) Insolvency Act, Section 34 Constitution access to courts, Section 7(3) Divorce Act, Security for costs, Security for costs, Trust joinder divorce, Trusts, Trusts, Vexatious Litigant, Vexatious litigation alter ego doctrine, attorney and client costs Scale B, corporate veil family law, discretionary remedy security for costs, divorce litigation strategy, divorce trusts South Africa, family law South Africa, Fusion Properties v Stellenbosch Municipality, impecunious spouse constitutional rights, insolvent spouse litigation, joinder of companies divorce, joinder of trusts divorce, piercing the corporate veil, redistribution claim trusts, redistribution of assets, Rule 47 Uniform Rules of Court, section 23(6) Insolvency Act, section 34 Constitution access to courts, section 7(3) Divorce Act, security for costs, Shepstone & Wiley v Geyser, tactical litigation abuse of process, trust beneficiary divorce South Africa, trust joinder divorce, unrehabilitated insolvent divorce, vexatious litigation divorce, Welgemoed AJ, Western Cape High Court, ZAWCHC 2026 Piercing the Veil and Opening the Courthouse Doors: How South African Courts Refuse to Let Security for Costs Become a Weapon of Oppression in Divorce Litigation — M.A.V. NO and Others v E.V (Case No. 8692/2020) [2026] ZAWCHC 167 (14 April 2026). The Facts: Divorce, Sequestration and a Web of Trusts and Companies The matter of M.A.V. NO and Others v E.V (Case No. 8692/2020) ZAWCHC 167 (14 April 2026) concerns an… READ MORE