25/10/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Arrear Maintenance Variation, Attorney and client costs, Child Maintenance, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Contempt of court maintenance, Costs, Divorce, Fakie test, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Court, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Procedural Law, Procedure, Punitive costs orders, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Serial contempt, Spousal Maintenance Arrear Maintenance, Attorney and Client Costs, Cloete J, consent paper, contempt of court, D.O v M.E, divorce order, enforcement of maintenance, evidential burden, financial disclosure, HEG Consulting v Siegwart, LAN v OR Tambo Airport, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, maintenance court jurisdiction, Maintenance Order, MM v MF, non-encumbrance clause, rehabilitative maintenance, Secretary of the Judicial Commission v Zuma, section 6(2) jurisdiction, self-help, spousal maintenance South Africa, SS v VVS, Suspended Sentence, variation of maintenance, Western Cape High Court, wilful and mala fide, writ of execution maintenance, ZAWCHC 624 Self-Help Is Not a Defence: Ex-Husband Held in Contempt for Flouting Maintenance Order in D.O v M.E (6955/2018) [2026] ZAWCHC 624 (21 October 2026). This case concerns a former husband who, for the better part of seven years, paid his ex-wife’s court-ordered rehabilitative maintenance when and in the amount he chose, pleaded poverty and… 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
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