20/07/2025 Bertus Preller Caveat Subscriptor, Contractual repudiation, Divorce, Pacta sunt servanda, Procedural Law, Recission of Divorce Orders, Settlement agreement finality, Settlement agreements, Validity Divorce Settlement Agreement Auckland Park case, caveat subscriptor, child maintenance, contractual interpretation, contractual repudiation, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, Divorce Decree, divorce litigation, divorce proceedings, divorce settlement agreement, family law practice, George v Fairmead, High Court Gauteng, Legal Representation, maintenance agreements, matrimonial property, Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund, Pacta Sunt Servanda, Parental Rights, post-signature regret, property forfeiture, settlement agreement validity, settlement negotiations, South African Family Law, spousal maintenance, undue influence, Van der Schyff J, vitiating factors, witness attestation Caveat Subscriptor Strikes Again: When Post-Signature Regret Meets Divorce Reality in O.M.L v S.S.L (10528/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 712 (16 July 2025). The Factual Matrix: When Signatures Tell a Different Story The factual backdrop of this matter presents a curious tale of matrimonial dissolution that would make any family law practitioner pause.… READ MORE
13/07/2025 Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Child protection, Children, Children's Court, Conduct of Childcare Experts, constitutional rights of children, Family reunification, Foster care, Grandparents Rights, Kinship care, Parental Rights, Procedural Law, Section 28 Constitution 4 July 2025, best interests of the child South Africa, Cape Town High Court, care and contact orders, child custody South Africa, child protection, child removal South Africa, child witness protection, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Children’s Court appeal, constitutional rights of children, Dr Astrid Martalas, ex parte court orders, family law South Africa, family reunification judgment, foster care legal challenge, High Court appeal 2025, kinship care, legal precedent family law, legal safeguards in child care, Magistrate Sipoyo judgment, no-contact order South Africa, Parental Rights, procedural fairness South Africa, psychological harm attachment, Rule of Law family matters, S.E.T and Others v Department of Justice, Section 28 Constitution, ZAWCHC 282 “Torn Apart Without Cause”: High Court Slams Children’s Court in S.E.T and Others v Department of Justice and Another (A83/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 282 (4 July 2025). The Factual Matrix: Arrests, Allegations and the Path to Atlantis Court This matter originated in deeply troubling circumstances involving two minor children, a six-year-old girl (X) and a one-year-old boy… READ MORE
02/07/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Adversarial Legal System, Costs, Divorce, Family Law Court System South Africa, Procedural Law, Procedure, Punitive Cost Orders, Rule 30A, Uniform Form Rules of Court Afrocentrics case, attorney costs orders, Bloem case, civil procedure, condonation applications, court deadlines, court rules compliance, de bonis propriis costs, Family Court, family law proceedings, Helen Suzman Foundation case, High Court Johannesburg, late filing affidavits, legal practitioner conduct, litigation management, motion proceedings, Multi-Links case, Parental Responsibilities, Procedural irregularities, procedural non-compliance, professional conduct, Rule 27, Rule 28, Rule 30A, Rule 6, South African Law, supplementary affidavits, Uniform Rules of Court When Procedure Trumps Substance: Dissecting Rule 30A Non-Compliance in N.S v A.D (2022/257) [2025] ZAGPJHC 632 (20 June 2025). Factual Background: A Tale of Procedural Non-Compliance in Family Law Proceedings The factual matrix in N.S v A.D presents a striking illustration of how procedural non-compliance can derail even the… READ MORE
02/07/2025 Bertus Preller Appeal, Divorce, Procedural Law, Procedure, Rule 42 variation application accrual system, appellate procedures, collateral attack judgments, common mistake divorce, costs follow the cause, divorce decree variation, ex tempore judgment, final judgment finality, fraudulent misrepresentation, High Court North West Division, joint estate division, judicial officers function, legal certainty principles, legal representation errors, litigation finality, marriage out of community of property, matrimonial disputes, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, Matrimonial Property Regime, pleadings integrity, pre-nuptial contract, procedural missteps, property division claims, Rule 42 variation application, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court, Zweni case finality When Variation Applications Fail: The Limits of Rule 42 Common Mistake in K.P.M v O.L.M and Another (Reasons) (1751/2008) [2025] ZANWHC 103 (17 June 2025). The Genesis of the Dispute: A Marriage Out of Community of Property Revisited The roots of this protracted legal dispute stretch back to 7 February 1991, when the applicant and… READ MORE
02/07/2025 Bertus Preller Divorce, Divorce settlement defects, Liquidator, Procedural Law, Receiver Divorce, Recission of Divorce Orders, Settlement agreement finality, Settlement agreement interpretation, Settlement agreement variation, Settlement agreements Children's Best Interests, children's inheritance rights, community of property marriages, condonation applications, debt-free property preservation, Divorce Act section 7(8), divorce aftermath litigation, divorce settlement defects, joint estate liquidation, legal representation duties, liquidator appointment applications, matrimonial home disputes, matrimonial property trust, motion proceedings evidence, pension benefits accrual, pension fund entitlements, pension interest claims, Plascon-Evans rule, post-divorce disputes, property occupation disputes, res judicata principles, Rule 42 variation applications, settlement agreement finality, settlement agreement variation, trust beneficiaries protection, trust registration requirements, trustee appointment orders, unrepresented parties divorce Six Years Later: Defective Settlement Clause Triggers Failed Liquidation Bid in PLB v LRB (36798/2014) [2025] ZAGPPHC 600 – 4 June 2025. The Facts: A Matrimonial Home Dispute Six Years After Divorce This case concerned a post-divorce dispute that arose six years after the dissolution of marriage between PLB and LRB, who… READ MORE
29/06/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Alienation, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Costs, Divorce, Family Advocate, Joint Decision Making, Maintenance, Parental Alienation, Parental Rights, Rule 43, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Spousal Maintenance, Variation Rule 43(6) B.P.M v J.L.M, best interests of the child, child contact, co-parenting, Colman v Colman, Contact rights, custody variation, divorce litigation, Du Preez v Du Preez, Family Advocate, family advocate report, family law South Africa, forensic psychologist, High Court Limpopo, interim maintenance, Mangena AJ, parental alienation, parenting plans, PAS, Rule 43 Application, Rule 43(6), shared residency, Soller v G, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, spousal support South Africa, Variation Application, Visser v Visser, ZALMPPHC 96 Parental Alienation, Prolixity and the Best Interests Principle in B.P.M v J.L.M (1909/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 96 (13 May 2025). Background and Factual Matrix of the Rule 43(6) Dispute The matter before the court in B.P.M v J.L.M (1909/2024) ZALMPPHC 96 (13 May 2025) concerned a Rule 43(6) application brought… READ MORE
29/06/2025 Bertus Preller Divorce, Procedural Law, Recission of Divorce Orders, Urgency costs in urgent divorce application, curator ad litem, divorce settlement dispute, E.E v T.C.E, East Rock Trading case, Family Advocate investigation, family advocate report, family law procedure, fraud in divorce proceedings, Gauteng Division Pretoria, Lindeque v Hirsch case, minor children divorce court, non-disclosure in divorce, non-joinder, Pretoria High Court, procedural fairness, rescinding divorce agreement, rescission of divorce order, rescission under common law, SARS v Hawker Air Services, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court, urgency in divorce, urgent child residency change, urgent divorce application, urgent High Court application, urgent motion divorce, urgent rescission case, ZAGPPHC 492 Urgency Dismissed: Lessons from E.E v T.C.E (113234/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 492 (16 May 2025) on Rescission, Disclosure and Children’s Rights in Divorce Proceedings. The Factual Matrix: A Mother’s Urgent Attempt to Set Aside a Divorce Settlement Agreement This case arose from an urgent application brought by the applicant, E.E, who sought to have… READ MORE
28/06/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Discovery, Divorce, Fishing expedition discovery, Matrimonial proceedings discovery, Procedural Law, Rule 35(1) discovery, Rule 35(14) abuse of process discovery, court compulsion applications, court discovery procedures, discovery alternative mechanisms, discovery application abuse, discovery application costs, discovery application timing, discovery case management, discovery legal principles, discovery mechanism selection, discovery procedural errors, discovery timing requirements, document compulsion applications, document inspection rules, essential documents test, fishing expedition discovery, joint estate document access, matrimonial discovery disputes, matrimonial litigation discovery, matrimonial proceedings discovery, matrimonial property documentation, pleading purposes discovery, post-pleading discovery, procedural abuse family law, procedural discipline discovery, procedural requirements discovery, Rule 35(1) discovery, Rule 35(14) South Africa Procedural Abuse in Discovery: M.G.K v M.J.K (2024/074608) [2025] ZAGPPHC 535 (23 May 2025) – When Rule 35(14) Goes Wrong. The Factual Matrix: Divorce Proceedings and Document Discovery Disputes This procedural dispute arose within the context of contested divorce proceedings that commenced in March 2024, when the applicant instituted action… READ MORE
10/06/2025 Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Conduct of Childcare Experts, Divorce, Guardianship, International Travel, Maintenance, Muslim Marriages, Parental Coordinator, Parental Rights, Procedural Law, Relocation best interests of child, child psychology relocation, child relocation South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, constitutional family law, contact arrangements international, cross-border parenting, custodial parent rights, divorce relocation orders, expert witness family law, F v F constitutional rights, Family Advocate reports, family law South Africa, freedom of movement parents, gender discrimination family law, gender equality family court, international custody disputes, international relocation disputes, Jackson v Jackson precedent, KwaZulu-Natal High Court, maintenance obligations relocation, mirror orders international, non-custodial parent contact, parental alienation allegations, parental consent relocation, passport consent children, Portugal relocation case, primary caregiver rights, visa requirements minors Breaking the Shackles: How W.S v N.V (D376/2020; D1062/2021) [2025] ZAKZDHC 35 (6 June 2025) Transformed South African Child Relocation Law and Gender Rights. The Facts: A Family Torn Between Two Continents This case presents a deeply personal yet legally complex dispute that unfolded over several years, illustrating the profound challenges faced by divorced… READ MORE
18/04/2025 Bertus Preller Arrears, Contempt of Court, Costs, Maintenance, Procedural Law, Variation application proceedings, best interests of children, changed financial circumstances, child support, Civil Contempt, constitutional right of access to courts, contempt of court, Court Order Compliance, enforcement mechanisms, eviction risk, family home, Judicial Discretion, leave to appeal, maintenance arrears, maintenance beneficiaries, maintenance enforcement, maintenance obligations, Maintenance Order, mala fides, Parker AJ, periodic imprisonment, Plascon Evans test, purging contempt, South African Family Law, Superior Courts Act, Suspended Sentence, Variation Application, Western Cape High Court, willful non-compliance Contempt Before Variation: E.W v V.T.H (Leave to Appeal) (7333/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 162 (11 April 2025). Background to the E.W v V.T.H Contempt Application The case of E.W v V.T.H (Leave to Appeal) (7333/2024) ZAWCHC 162 (11 April 2025) highlights the ongoing tension between maintenance obligations… READ MORE