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
01/03/2026 Bertus Preller Appeal, Arrear maintenance claims, Arrear Maintenance Variation, Child Maintenance, Children, Contempt of court maintenance, Duty to maintain, Maintenance, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Court, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Noting a maintenance appeal, Regulation 15 maintenance appeal, Section 15 Maintenance Act, Section 25 maintenance appeal, Technology in Law appellate interference maintenance, calendar days versus court days, Cape Town maintenance court, child maintenance South Africa, CPI escalation maintenance, Douglas v Douglas, duty to maintain children, education price index, household expense apportionment, Interpretation Act 33 of 1957, Magistrates' Court Rules, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, maintenance appeal, maintenance appeal time limits, maintenance court, maintenance enquiry, maintenance formula, Maintenance Order, medical costs maintenance order, Mentz v Simpson, noting a maintenance appeal, pro rata maintenance calculation, reasonable maintenance expenses, Regulation 15 maintenance appeal, school fees maintenance, section 15 Maintenance Act, section 25 maintenance appeal, unrepresented litigant maintenance, Western Cape High Court Maintenance Appeals Unpacked: Timing, Calculations and the Separation of Costs — T.M-S v I.N (Appeal) (A31/2025) [2026] ZAWCHC 72 (19 February 2026). The Facts: A Maintenance Enquiry Gone Awry The matter of T.M-S v I.N (Appeal) (A31/2025) ZAWCHC 72 (19 February 2026) came before Pangarker J and Davis AJ in the Western… READ MORE
16/01/2026 Bertus Preller Adultery, Children, Divorce, Divorce Act section 9, Forfeiture of Benefits, Forfeiture patrimonial benefits, In Community of Property, Matrimonial property forfeiture, Pension Funds, Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956, Pension interest, Substantial misconduct, Substantial misconduct, Undue benefit test adultery extra-marital relationship, balancing contributions misconduct, Botha v Botha forfeiture, BS v PS isolated misconduct, credibility assessment divorce proceedings, cumulative misconduct assessment, discretion costs divorce matters, divorce irretrievable breakdown, domestic contributions recognition, duration of marriage neutral factor, family law Gauteng Division, forfeiture patrimonial benefits, homemaker contributions divorce, humiliation spouse dignity, marriage in community of property, Mashola v Mashola holistic approach, Municipal Gratuity Fund, non-financial contributions marriage, partial forfeiture pension only, pension interest forfeiture, procreation with third party, public humiliation Facebook, sale joint estate property, section 9 Divorce Act, social media pregnancy announcement, substantial misconduct divorce, two-step forfeiture test, undue benefit divorce, value judgment forfeiture orders Forfeiture of Pension Benefits for Adultery, Procreation and Public Humiliation via Social Media: E.M v S.M (096891/2024) [2026] ZAGPPHC 8 (12 January 2026). Factual Background: Extra-Marital Relationship and the Birth of a Third Child The parties in this matter were married in community of property on 10 January 2011. Their marriage, which lasted… READ MORE
15/01/2026 Bertus Preller 1996 Hague Convention, Abducting parent defences, Abduction, Article 3 Hague Convention, Best interests of child short-term, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Cross-border parental rights recognition, Curator Ad Litem, Custody, Dependency model habitual residence, Domicile, Grave risk psychological harm, Habitual Residence, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Inter-provincial custody, International child retention, Parental Alienation, Parental responsibility Italian law, Parental Rights, Relocation, Unmarried fathers, Unmarried Parents 1996 Hague Convention, acquiescence defence child abduction, Article 13 defences, Article 3 Hague Convention, best interests of child short-term, Central Authority South Africa, child custody Switzerland, cross-border parental rights recognition, curator ad litem appointment, custody rights unmarried fathers, dependency model habitual residence, family law international jurisdiction, Geneva habitual residence, grave risk psychological harm, habitual residence determination, Hague Convention child abduction, international child retention, international family law, Italian Civil Code Article 316, parental responsibility Italian law, parental rights operation of law, protective measures return orders, return order conditions, settled purpose intention residence, Swiss Civil Code parental rights, Swiss Federal Act Private International Law, unmarried parents custodial rights, wrongful removal children, wrongful retention South Africa Unmarried Parents’ Custodial Rights and Cross-Border Habitual Residence: Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa v MV and Another (1396/2024) [2025] ZASCA 197 (18 December 2025). Factual Background: From Geneva to Gauteng – The Retention of a Minor Child The factual matrix in this matter presents a textbook illustration of how international child retention disputes arise… READ MORE
06/01/2026 Bertus Preller Abduction, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Family law international travel, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Holiday Travel, International relocation, International Travel, International travel with minors, Relocation, Section 26B Citizenship Act, South African passport requirements best interests of child, citizenship offences major citizens, court authorization travel minors, custody international relocation, Da Silva Salie J, Department of Home Affairs, dispensing parental consent, divorce order contact rights, Family Advocate investigation, family law international travel, family law practitioners South Africa, immigration compliance minor children, international travel with minors, minor child travel authorization, parental rights international travel, passport non-compliance consequences, passport renewal minor child, section 26B Citizenship Act, section 28(2) Constitution, sibling relationships contact disputes, South African passport requirements, travel safeguards return flights, upper guardian powers, Western Cape High Court Section 26B Citizenship Act Does Not Apply to Minors: A.T.A v L.A.A (2025/246332) [2025] ZAWCHC 597 (19 December 2025) Clarifies International Travel Authorisation. Introduction The Western Cape High Court recently delivered an important judgment clarifying the application of passport and citizenship requirements to minor children travelling internationally. In A.T.A v L.A.A (2025/246332) ZAWCHC… READ MORE
19/12/2025 Bertus Preller Adversarial Legal System, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Children's matters South Africa, Divorce, Hostile Family Lawyers, Lawyer-client alignment, Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, Litigation misconduct, LPC Code of Conduct, LPC Code of Conduct, Mediation, Parental Coordinator, Parental Rights, Rule 41A mediation notice, Zealous advocacy adversarial litigation, Alternative Dispute Resolution, attorney ethics children, best interests of child, child-centred advocacy, child-focused representation, children's matters South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, co-parenting relationships, collaborative family law, contact disputes, costs de bonis propriis, custody disputes, family law ethics, family law South Africa, family mediation mandatory, lawyer-client alignment, Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, Legal Practice Council, LPC Code of Conduct, mediation family law, parental alienation, parental conflict, parenting responsibilities, professional conduct family lawyers, Rule 43 applications, section 6(4) Children's Act, section 7 Children's Act, Van den Berg v Le Roux, zealous advocacy When Lawyers Become Warriors: The Dangers of Over-Identification with Clients in South African Children’s Matters. Introduction In high conflict childcare and contact disputes, lawyers sometimes align so closely with their clients’ positions that they become virtual proxies for parental animosity. This “over-identification” with clients, even… 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
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
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