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
23/09/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Contempt of court maintenance, Costs, Divorce, Maintenance, Procedural Law, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Variation Rule 43(6) Court Orders Are Not Optional: Contempt, Self-Help and Rule 43 in S.L v A.C and Another (2026/047264) [2026] ZAWCHC 536 (17 September 2026). The facts: an attempt to recover a Mercedes-Benz in the midst of protracted divorce litigation S.L v A.C and Another (2026/047264) ZAWCHC 536 (17 September 2026) concerned an application arising… READ MORE
12/09/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Arrear Maintenace, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Contempt of court maintenance, Costs, Divorce, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Procedural Law, Punitive costs orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Serial contempt, Spousal Maintenance attorney-and-own-client costs, best interests of minor children, beyond reasonable doubt, contempt of court, court order enforcement, D W v J L K, divorce litigation South Africa, evidentiary burden, Fakie case, full financial disclosure, interim maintenance, maintenance defaulter, maintenance enforcement, Maintenance Order, mala fides, mortgage bond arrears, non-compliance with court order, periodic imprisonment, Plascon-Evans rule, punitive costs, Rule 43, Rule 43 maintenance, South African Family Law, standard of proof, suspended committal, V.P v D.P, weekend imprisonment, Western Cape High Court, wilful non-compliance Defying a Rule 43 Maintenance Order: Weekend Imprisonment and Punitive Costs in V.P v D.P (2026/190344) [2026] ZAWCHC 509 (10 September 2026). The Facts: Persistent Non-compliance with a Rule 43 Maintenance Order In V.P v D.P (2026/190344) ZAWCHC 509 (10 September 2026), Davis J dealt with an urgent application arising from a… 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
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
30/09/2025 Bertus Preller Alimony, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Costs, Maintenance, Procedural Law, Rule 43, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Unaffordability defence, Variation Rule 43(6) affordability defence evidence, civil contempt South Africa, constitutional rights maintenance, contempt of court, contribution to legal costs, Equality of Arms, Fakie test contempt, financial disclosure requirements, Gauteng High Court Johannesburg, joint estate litigation, judicial integrity, late filing affidavits, maintenance arrears, mala fide conduct, procedural abuse family law, punitive costs order, Rule 43 proceedings, Rule 43(6) variation, section 10 dignity, section 34 access to justice, section 9 equality, spousal maintenance non-payment, suspended sentence contempt, T.F.C v B.J.C 2025, unaffordability defence, Uniform Rules of Court, warrant of arrest maintenance, wilful non-compliance, ZAGPJHC 956 When “I Cannot Afford It” Fails: Contempt, Constitutional Rights and Procedural Abuse in T.F.C v B.J.C (21300/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 956 (25 September 2025). From Rule 43 Relief to Repeated Refusal: The Factual Matrix of Mounting Non-Compliance The factual backdrop to this contempt application reveals a distressing pattern of deliberate defiance that began almost… READ MORE