09/10/2026 Bertus Preller Absence of a party, Contempt of Court, Divorce, Ex parte application, Fraud, non-disclosure, Maintenance, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, Maintenance Court, Procedural Law, Reconsideration application, Rescission, common law rescission, Rule 42(1)(a), Schlesinger v Schlesinger, Self-created urgency, Urgency, Urgent applications, Urgent divorce applications, Zuma v Secretary Judicial Commission absence of a party, common law rescission, contempt of court, divorce consent paper, East Rock Trading, ex parte application, finality of judgments, fraud, Greig AJ, Luna Meubel, Madavanhu, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, maintenance arrears, non-disclosure, periodical imprisonment, Rainbow Farms, reconsideration application, rescission, Rule 41A mediation, Rule 42(1)(a), Rule 6(12)(c), Schlesinger v Schlesinger, section 10 enquiry, Self-Created Urgency, spousal maintenance, Urgent Application, Western Cape High Court, writ of commitment, Zuma v Secretary Judicial Commission When Both Sides Lose: “Absence”, Self-Created Urgency and a Decade of Maintenance Litigation: E.H v J.C.J.V.D (19849/2022) [2026] ZAWCHC 576 (2 October 2026). A Decade of Enforcement and a Friday Evening Hearing The judgment in E.H v J.C.J.V.D (19849/2022) ZAWCHC 576 (2 October 2026), delivered by Greig AJ in the Western Cape Division,… 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
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
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
17/08/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Arrear Maintenance, Child Maintenance, Children, Contempt of Court, Divorce, Maintenance Court, Procedural Law, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance ad factum praestandum, attorney and own client costs, Bannatyne v Bannatyne, committal, contempt of court, Divorce, Divorce Attorney Cape Town, dolus eventualis, emoluments attachment, Fakie v CCII Systems, family law South Africa, Firestone v Genticuro, HG v AG, interim maintenance, M.D.V v F.M.D.V, maintenance enforcement, Maintenance Order, mala fides, medical aid, Pheko v Ekurhuleni, purging contempt, reimbursement of expenses, Rule 43, spousal maintenance, Suspended Sentence, Western Cape High Court, wilfulness, Writ of Execution, ZAWCHC 411 Pay Now, Argue Never: Husband’s Selective Compliance with Rule 43 Maintenance Order Lands Him a Suspended Prison Sentence — M.D.V v F.M.D.V (2025/091265) [2026] ZAWCHC 411 (14 August 2026). The Western Cape Division has once again demonstrated that it will not tolerate maintenance debtors who treat interim maintenance orders as optional, negotiable or subject to their own private assessment… READ MORE
23/07/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Cohabitation, Costs, Divorce, Financial non-disclosure, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Non-disclosure consequences, Procedural Law, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance ability to pay, best interests of the child, child maintenance, Divorce Law, divorce proceedings, earning capacity, family law judgment, financial disclosure, financial non-disclosure, full and frank disclosure, H.L v B.L, inflated expenses, interim maintenance, interim relief, legal costs contribution, maintenance claim, Maintenance Order, maintenance pendente lite, marital standard of living, Minor Children, Njokweni J, Rule 43, Rule 43 Application, South African case law, South African Family Law, spousal maintenance, uberrima fides, Western Cape divorce, Western Cape High Court Candour, Children and the Limits of Interim Maintenance: H.L v B.L (2025/216979) [2026] ZAWCHC 350 (13 July 2026). The factual background and the parties’ competing claims In H.L v B.L (2025/216979) ZAWCHC 350 (13 July 2026), the Western Cape High Court was required to determine an application for… READ MORE
31/05/2026 Bertus Preller Conflict of Interest, Eviction, In Community of Property, Joinder, Joinder of convenience, Locus Standi, LPC Code of Conduct, LPC Code of Conduct, PIE ACT, Plascon Evans Rule, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Section 17 Matrimonial Property Act, Spousal Eviction Absa Bank v Naude, clause 3.9 legal practitioners, conflict of interest attorney, customary marriage community of property, direct and substantial interest, dispute of fact motion proceedings, Gordon v Department of Health, joinder of convenience, joint estate litigation, locus standi eviction, LPC Code of Conduct, Matjhabeng Local Municipality, N.C.M.W v P.S.K, necessary joinder, oral evidence referral, person in charge PIE, PIE Act eviction, Plascon-Evans rule, Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Room Hire Co, Rule 6(5)(g) referral, section 17 Matrimonial Property Act, spousal consent litigation, spousal joinder eviction, universal partnership co-ownership, unlawful occupier, Western Cape High Court eviction, Wightman v Headfour, ZAWCHC 272 Eviction by One Spouse, Joinder of the Other, and the Conflict Trap: Lessons from N.C.M.W v P.S.K and Others (2025/218300) [2026] ZAWCHC 272 (29 May 2026). A recent judgment of the Western Cape Division, N.C.M.W v P.S.K and Others (2025/218300) ZAWCHC 272 (29 May 2026), is a useful teaching case. On its face it is a… READ MORE
17/04/2026 Bertus Preller Alter ego trust, Attorney and client costs, Costs, Divorce, Insolvent spouse litigation, Out of community of property, Piercing the corporate veil, Procedural Law, Punitive Cost Orders, Punitive costs orders, Redistribution Claim, Rule 47 Uniform Rules of Court, Section 23(6) Insolvency Act, Section 34 Constitution access to courts, Section 7(3) Divorce Act, Security for costs, Security for costs, Trust joinder divorce, Trusts, Trusts, Vexatious Litigant, Vexatious litigation alter ego doctrine, attorney and client costs Scale B, corporate veil family law, discretionary remedy security for costs, divorce litigation strategy, divorce trusts South Africa, family law South Africa, Fusion Properties v Stellenbosch Municipality, impecunious spouse constitutional rights, insolvent spouse litigation, joinder of companies divorce, joinder of trusts divorce, piercing the corporate veil, redistribution claim trusts, redistribution of assets, Rule 47 Uniform Rules of Court, section 23(6) Insolvency Act, section 34 Constitution access to courts, section 7(3) Divorce Act, security for costs, Shepstone & Wiley v Geyser, tactical litigation abuse of process, trust beneficiary divorce South Africa, trust joinder divorce, unrehabilitated insolvent divorce, vexatious litigation divorce, Welgemoed AJ, Western Cape High Court, ZAWCHC 2026 Piercing the Veil and Opening the Courthouse Doors: How South African Courts Refuse to Let Security for Costs Become a Weapon of Oppression in Divorce Litigation — M.A.V. NO and Others v E.V (Case No. 8692/2020) [2026] ZAWCHC 167 (14 April 2026). The Facts: Divorce, Sequestration and a Web of Trusts and Companies The matter of M.A.V. NO and Others v E.V (Case No. 8692/2020) ZAWCHC 167 (14 April 2026) concerns an… 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