12/04/2026 Bertus Preller Child born outside marriage, Child Maintenance, Children, Divorce, In Community of Property, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Rule 43, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance child born outside marriage, community of property divorce, costs in the divorce, divorce litigation South Africa, divorce proceedings South Africa, EH v SH, extra-marital child maintenance, family law South Africa, Forfeiture of benefits, Gauteng High Court, interim maintenance, interlocutory divorce relief, joint estate, joint property income, maintenance duty stepchild, minor child support, NM v BM, pendente lite maintenance, pendente lite relief, rental income divorce, Reyneke v Reyneke, Rule 43, Rule 43 limitations, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, step-parent maintenance duty, trial court jurisdiction, Uniform Rules of Court, ZAGPJHC When Love Goes Wrong and the Law Says No: The Limits of Rule 43 and a Husband’s Failed Bid for Maintenance and Rental Income — C.M.N v N.N (2025/177461) [2026] ZAGPJHC 320 (31 March 2026). The Facts: An Unemployed Husband, an Extra-Marital Child, and a Contested Rental Income This is an opposed application brought in terms of Rule 43 of the Uniform Rules of Court… READ MORE
02/04/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Children, Costs, Divorce, Financial non-disclosure, Maintenance, Non-disclosure consequences, Punitive costs orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Variation Rule 43(6) 2-2-3 contact schedule, care and contact, child maintenance, costs contribution, divorce costs, divorce proceedings, Fairways Business Trust, Family Advocate, family trust, financial non-disclosure, forensic auditor, Genius Academy, interim maintenance, legal costs contribution, material change of circumstances, matrimonial property, medical aid maintenance, minor child, patriarchal misdirection, pende lite maintenance, right of first refusal, Rule 43, Rule 43(6), social worker report, South African Family Law, spousal maintenance, sworn valuator, Thembalethu High Court, VW Touareg When Opacity Meets Obligation: Spousal Maintenance, Financial Non-Disclosure and the Limits of Rule 43 — J.V.D.B v O.V.D.B (234/25) [2026] ZAWCHC 136 (23 March 2026). The Facts and Background to the Rule 43(6) Application The matter of J.V.D.B v O.V.D.B (234/25) ZAWCHC 136 (23 March 2026) came before Thulare J in the High Court of… READ MORE
16/03/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Appeal, Arrear Maintenace, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Best Interests of the Child, Child Maintenance, Children, Divorce, Duty to maintain, Interim Maintenance, Interlocutory applications, Irregular proceedings, Leave to appeal Superior Courts Act, Maintenance, Maintenance Court, Parental Rights, Pendente Lite, Procedural Law, Punitive costs orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Appeal, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, Rule 58, Spousal Maintenance, Stepparents, Variation Rule 43(6) accrual system, appealability, blended families, common law development, Divorce, divorce proceedings, duty of support, Family Law, Govindjee AJA, interests of justice, interim maintenance, interim relief, jurisdictional threshold, maintenance pendente lite, non-appealability, out of community of property, piecemeal appeals, Rule 43, Rule 43(6), SCA, section 16(3), section 173 Constitution, South African divorce law, statutory bar, stepchildren, stepparent maintenance, Superior Courts Act, Supreme Court of Appeal, Western Cape High Court Blended Families, Bitter Disputes and a Blocked Appeal: The SCA Draws the Line on Rule 43 Appealability in B.E v N.T and Others (505/2025) [2026] ZASCA 25 (11 March 2026). The Facts: A Blended Family, a Breakdown, and a Battle Over Stepchildren's Maintenance BE and NT married on 27 April 2018, out of community of property subject to the accrual… READ MORE
09/03/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Cohabitation, Cohabitation, Cohabitation trends, Interim Maintenance, Interim Maintenance Cohabitation, Life Partnerships, Maintenance, Rule 43 orders, Unmarried Maintenance ancillary jurisdiction peregrinus, balance of convenience maintenance, Bwanya Constitutional Court, cohabitation legal rights South Africa, cohabitation maintenance South Africa, common law development life partnership, Da Silva Salie J, duty of support life partners, EW v VH minority judgment, family law South Africa 2026, interim maintenance, interim relief life partnership, irreparable harm life partner, life partner financial protection, life partnership maintenance South Africa, P.A.L v R.J.T, permanent life partnership, permanent opposite-sex life partnership, prima facie right maintenance, Rule 43 unmarried partners, Rule 6(5)(d)(iii) answering affidavit, section 10 dignity, section 39(2) Constitution, section 9 equality, unmarried life partner, Volks v Robinson life partnership, Western Cape High Court family law, Wille J minority judgment, ZAWCHC 99 2026 Breaking New Ground: South Africa’s First Interim Maintenance Award to an Unmarried Life Partner — P.A.L v R.J.T (17492/2023) [2026] ZAWCHC 99 (4 March 2026). The Facts: An Unmarried Partner Seeks Interim Maintenance P.A.L v R.J.T (17492/2023) ZAWCHC 99 (4 March 2026) came before Da Silva Salie J in the Western Cape Division of the… READ MORE
06/03/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Divorce, Duty to court, Duty to maintain, Financial non-disclosure, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Non-disclosure consequences, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Trusts, Trusts, Variation Rule 43(6) Pleading Poverty While Plundering the Pot: The Courts Draw a Hard Line on Rule 43(6) Abuse — C V S v S V S (18688/2022) [2026] ZAWCHC 30 (16 February 2026). The Facts: A Pattern of Non-Disclosure and Deliberate Financial Engineering In C V S v S V S (18688/2022) ZAWCHC 30 (16 February 2026), Holderness J was confronted with what… READ MORE
04/02/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Costs, Family Advocate, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Mediation, Non-disclosure consequences, Pendente Lite, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Uberrimae fidei matrimonial proceedings, Uniform Form Rules of Court adverse costs orders family law, clean hands doctrine, contribution to legal costs, contribution towards costs requirements, custody and contact disputes, Du Preez v Du Preez, duty of disclosure in divorce, duty of support spouses, equitable relief divorce, false affidavits maintenance, Family Advocate role, family law dishonesty, financial disclosure matrimonial proceedings, interim maintenance South Africa, maintenance court jurisdiction, matrimonial property disputes, Mediation in Certain Divorce Matters Act, non-disclosure consequences, Office of Family Advocate, perjury in divorce proceedings, prima facie case legal costs, Rule 43 applications, Rule 43 costs orders, Rule 43(5) discretion, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance pendente lite, uberrimae fidei matrimonial proceedings, Uniform Rules of Court Rule 43, Van Rippen v Van Rippen When Clean Hands Matter: The Fatal Cost of Non-Disclosure in Rule 43 Applications – S.J. J v M.M. J (2025/056214) [2026] ZAGPJHC 57 (2 February 2026). Factual Matrix: A Rule 43 Application Gone Wrong The parties married on 13 October 2012 in Johannesburg, out of community of property with the accrual system. Two minor children were… READ MORE
20/01/2026 Bertus Preller Accrual Calculation, Accrual Calculator, Accrual claims, Accrual system, Alimony, Asset Disclosure, Costs, Divorce, Exceptional circumstances separation, Financial Disclosure, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, matrimonial asset division, Matrimonial Properties Act, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, section 10 MPA, Separation Applications, Separation of issues, Spousal Maintenance accrual system divorce proceedings, antenuptial contract accrual system, balance of convenience separation, bifurcated divorce proceedings, cost of separation applications, Denel v Vorster separation principles, divorce accrual claim, exceptional circumstances separation, expeditious disposal litigation, financially vulnerable spouse, formal tenders divorce, full disclosure matrimonial assets, Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act, maintenance security life policy, matrimonial property act section 7, matrimonial property disclosure duties, post-divorce maintenance uncertainty, prejudice to respondent spouse, procedural protection vulnerable spouse, Rule 33(4) separation of issues, Rule 43 interim relief, section 10 MPA deferred payment, section 4(2) divorce act, South African divorce law 2026, spousal maintenance claim, strike date accrual calculation, upfront payment accrual, Western Cape High Court family law, Wille J divorce judgment Why Formal Tenders Matter: Separation Refused Without Security for Vulnerable Spouse in AMG and Another v TSG (2025/057077) [2026] ZAWCHC 6 (19 January 2026). Factual Matrix: A Marriage Breakdown Complicated by Accrual and Maintenance Claims The matter before Wille, J concerned a marriage of over three decades that had irretrievably broken down, but in… READ MORE
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
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
21/10/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Alimony, Asset Disclosure, Children, Costs, Divorce, Fishing expedition discovery, Gender equality, Hostile Family Lawyers, Interim Maintenance, Irregular proceedings, Maintenance, Matrimonial proceedings discovery, Procedural Law, Procedure, Prolixity, Punitive Cost Orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 43 orders, Rule 58 Access to Justice, accrual claims, attorney fees Rule 43, B.S v K.W.S 2025, catch me if you can divorce, Children's Best Interests, constitutional implications maintenance, contribution to legal costs, E v E full court, financial disclosure divorce, financially weaker spouse, full and frank disclosure, gender equality divorce, hiding assets divorce, interim relief pending divorce, interim spousal maintenance, KwaZulu-Natal High Court, length of court papers, maintenance pendente lite, matrimonial litigation, matrimonial property disputes, prolixity in divorce proceedings, relevant versus irrelevant evidence, Rule 43 applications, S.M v N.M 2024, South African Family Law, standard of living divorce, striking off applications, Uniform Rule 43 When Brevity Becomes Brutality: S.M v N.M (D6667/2024) [2024] ZAKZDHC 54 versus B.S v K.W.S (2025/027511) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1085 – Has Striking Off Rule 43 Applications for Prolixity Gone Too Far? Two Cases, Two Outcomes: The Factual Matrix of S.M v N.M and B.S v K.W.S The contrasting outcomes in S.M v N.M (D6667/2024) ZAKZDHC 54 (28 August 2024) and B.S… READ MORE