03/10/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Best Interests of the Child, Care and Contact, Child Maintenance, Childcare Expert, Children, Children's matters South Africa, Civil contempt South Africa, Contact Rights, Contempt of Court, Costs, Curator Ad Litem, Divorce, Forensic psychologist mandate, Hired Gun Expert, Maintenance, Parental rights and responsibilities, Pendente Lite, Primary Residence, Primary residence dispute, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Unlawful retention of a child, Urgency, Urgent applications, Variation Rule 43(6) best interests of the child, breach of court order, child abuse allegations, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Contact rights, court-appointed expert, curator ad litem, divorce litigation, DTL v GB, expert bias, family advocate report, family law South Africa, forensic psychologist mandate, Gauteng High Court Johannesburg, hired gun expert, interim care and contact, parental alienation, parental rights and responsibilities, pendente lite order, primary care, primary residence, Rule 43 variation, Rule 43(6), Rule 67A(3), scale C costs, self-help, sheriff enforcement, unlawful retention of a child, Urgent Application Self-Help Never Pays: Unlawful Retention of a Child and the Limits of Rule 43(6) — L.C.E v C.E (2026/226362) [2026] ZAGPJHC 1070 (29 September 2026). Neutral Citation: E v E (2026-226362) ZAGPJHC --- (29 September 2026) The Facts: A Four-Year-Old Caught in the Crossfire of a Brutal Divorce The parties in L.C.E v C.E (2026/226362)… READ MORE
03/10/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Child Maintenance, Clean Break Principle, Divorce, Divorce settlement agreement, Maintenance, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance termination, Pendente Lite, Post-divorce maintenance, Procedural Law, Rehabilitative maintenance, Rule 43 orders, Settlement agreements, Spousal Maintenance accrual system, Antenuptial Contract, Botha v Botha, clean break principle, Divorce Attorney Cape Town, divorce maintenance South Africa, divorce settlement, drawdown rate, earning capacity, expert evidence, family law South Africa, industrial psychologist, interim maintenance, lifelong maintenance, living annuity, maintenance after divorce, maintenance claim, partisan expert, Pendente Lite, pension interest, rehabilitative maintenance, Rule 43, Rule 43(6), section 37D Pension Funds Act, Section 7(2) Divorce Act, spousal maintenance, spousal support, trust assets divorce, Western Cape High Court No Right, Only a Discretion: Rehabilitative Maintenance, Earning Capacity and the Clean Break in H.L.B v J.B (6071/2021) [2026] ZAWCHC 561 (23 September 2026). The Facts: A Long Marriage, a R9.1 Million Settlement and a Maintenance Claim with No Tender The parties in H.L.B v J.B were married on 22 August 1998, out of… READ MORE
21/09/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Appeal, Appealability, Costs, Costs de bonis propriis, Divorce, Leave to appeal Superior Courts Act, Maintenance Court, Pendente Lite, Rule 43 Appeal, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance AF v MF, AG v LG, Attorney and Client Costs, BE v NT SCA, contribution towards costs, costs de bonis propriis, curator ad litem, Dicker NO v SJVDW, EB v CB Free State, family law South Africa, hopeless application costs, interim relief divorce, leave to appeal Rule 43, maintenance pendente lite, Pangarker J, past legal costs Rule 43, postponement Rule 43, Practice Directive 45B, refusal of postponement appealable, RM v AM, Rule 43, Rule 43 appeal, Rule 43(1)(b), Rule 43(6) variation, Rule 58 Magistrates Court, S v S Constitutional Court, section 16(3) Superior Courts Act, section 173 Constitution, Western Cape High Court Rule 43 Orders Cannot Be Appealed, and Persisting Costs the Attorney: Dicker NO v S.J.V.D.W (Leave to Appeal) (2026/006447) [2026] ZAWCHC 482 (7 September 2026). The Western Cape Division has once again been called upon to restate what ought by now to be trite in every family law practice in the country: orders granted in… 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
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