30/08/2026 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Alimony, Contumacious conduct, Divorce, Litigation misconduct, Procedural Law, Spousal Maintenance, Substantial misconduct, Substantial misconduct, Vexatious litigation change of front, conduct of parties, costs Rule 28(9), divorce amendment, divorce counterclaim, divorce pleadings, facta probantia, family law South Africa, irrelevant matter, J.P v M.P, Jowell v Bramwell-Jones, leave to amend, maintenance claim, matrimonial misconduct, Moolman v Estate Moolman, no-fault divorce, pleading evidence, Rule 18(4), Rule 23, Rule 28, S.T.H v A.T.H, scandalous allegations, Section 7(2) Divorce Act, spousal maintenance, striking out, Vaatz v Law Society, vexatious pleadings, Western Cape High Court, withdrawal of admission Pleading Fault in a No-Fault Divorce: When Do Conduct Allegations Cross the Line? J.P v M.P (13220/2021) [2026] ZAWCHC 410 (12 August 2026). Few interlocutory judgments manage to say something useful about both civil procedure and substantive family law in the same breath. The recent decision of Greig AJ in the Western Cape… READ MORE
17/01/2026 Bertus Preller Abuse, Contumacious conduct, Costs, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence, Emotional Abuse, Financial Abuse, Forfeiture of Benefits, Forfeiture patrimonial benefits, Harassment, In Community of Property, Marital misconduct, Matrimonial property forfeiture, Physical Abuse, Psychological Abuse, Punitive costs orders, Sexual Abuse, Substantial misconduct, Substantial misconduct, Verbal Abuse costs in divorce, discretion of court, divorce proceedings South Africa, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, duration of marriage, Engelbrecht v Engelbrecht, financial delinquency, financial irresponsibility, Forfeiture of benefits, interim protection orders, marital breakdown, marriage in community of property, Mashola v Mashola, matrimonial property, municipal debt, no-fault divorce, patrimonial benefits, pension benefit misconduct, section 9(1) Divorce Act, spousal abuse, substantial misconduct, transfer of property, two-stage approach, unduly benefited test, value judgment, Wijker principles When Domestic Violence and Financial Delinquency Justify Forfeiture: Analysis of W.M.C.M v U.A.M (7390/2018) [2026] ZAGPPHC 5 (12 January 2026). The Factual Matrix: A Pattern of Misconduct and Financial Delinquency The parties in this matter were married in community of property on 16 December 2000. The marriage endured for approximately… 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
15/08/2025 Bertus Preller Adultery, Divorce, Forfeiture of Benefits, Forfeiture patrimonial benefits, Matrimonial property forfeiture, Paternity Fraud, Substantial misconduct adultery divorce law, candidate attorney resources, divorce act section 9, divorce appeal court, divorce law practitioners, divorce proceedings South Africa, DNA paternity fraud, extramarital affairs legal consequences, family law South Africa, financial misconduct divorce, forfeiture application evidence, forfeiture patrimonial benefits, GEPF forfeiture, Government Employees Pension Fund, High Court Limpopo, joint estate division, law student materials, marital breakdown irretrievable, marriage community property, matrimonial assets protection, matrimonial misconduct, matrimonial property forfeiture, pension benefits forfeiture, pension interest forfeiture, perjury maintenance court, South African divorce law, substantial misconduct, substantial misconduct definition, undue benefit test Beyond Adultery: When Substantial Misconduct Justifies Total Forfeiture – M.C.M v M.S.M (Appeal) (HCA16/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 153 (11 August 2025). Factual Matrix: A Marriage Marred by Infidelity and Deception The parties entered into a marriage in community of property on 19 November 2015, with a significant age disparity - the… READ MORE