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
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
21/10/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Alimony, Asset Disclosure, Children, Costs, Divorce, Fishing expedition discovery, Gender equality, Hostile Family Lawyers, Interim Maintenance, Irregular proceedings, Maintenance, Matrimonial proceedings discovery, Procedural Law, Procedure, Prolixity, Punitive Cost Orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 43 orders, Rule 58 Access to Justice, accrual claims, attorney fees Rule 43, B.S v K.W.S 2025, catch me if you can divorce, Children's Best Interests, constitutional implications maintenance, contribution to legal costs, E v E full court, financial disclosure divorce, financially weaker spouse, full and frank disclosure, gender equality divorce, hiding assets divorce, interim relief pending divorce, interim spousal maintenance, KwaZulu-Natal High Court, length of court papers, maintenance pendente lite, matrimonial litigation, matrimonial property disputes, prolixity in divorce proceedings, relevant versus irrelevant evidence, Rule 43 applications, S.M v N.M 2024, South African Family Law, standard of living divorce, striking off applications, Uniform Rule 43 When Brevity Becomes Brutality: S.M v N.M (D6667/2024) [2024] ZAKZDHC 54 versus B.S v K.W.S (2025/027511) [2025] ZAGPPHC 1085 – Has Striking Off Rule 43 Applications for Prolixity Gone Too Far? Two Cases, Two Outcomes: The Factual Matrix of S.M v N.M and B.S v K.W.S The contrasting outcomes in S.M v N.M (D6667/2024) ZAKZDHC 54 (28 August 2024) and B.S… READ MORE
07/08/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse, Adversarial Legal System, Child Bullying, Child protection, Children, Children's Court, Conduct of Childcare Experts, constitutional rights of children, Contempt of Court, Costs, Curator Ad Litem, Emotional Abuse, Family reunification, Grandparents Rights, Guardianship, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Hostile Family Lawyers, Joint Decision Making, Parental Alienation, Parental Coordinator, Parental Rights, Punitive Cost Orders, Reunification, Reunification therapy, Section 28 Constitution, Views of the Child AB-PA, attachment-based parental alienation, Australian parenting orders, best interests of the child, child’s rights, children’s act, co-parenting programs, contempt enforcement, curator ad litem, custody variation, differential diagnosis, emotional abuse, expert evidence, Family Advocate inquiries, forensic psychologist, interim orders, international comparison, legislative reform, multi-disciplinary approach, parental alienation, parenting coordinator, preventive education, psychological assessment, reunification therapy, Rule 43 applications, South African Family Law, supervised contact, therapeutic court orders, UK CAFCASS model, US friendly parent factor Parental Alienation in South African Family Law: Legal Framework, Case Analysis, and Comparative Perspectives. Introduction Parental alienation has emerged as one of the most heart-wrenching dilemmas in South African family law, surfacing with alarming frequency in high-conflict divorces and custody battles. At its core,… READ MORE
20/08/2024 Bertus Preller Accrual Calculation, Adversarial Legal System, Costs, Divorce, Hostile Family Lawyers, Maintenance, Procedure, Rule 43, Separation Applications, Subpoenas, Trusts accrual calculations, asset valuation, complex divorces, Divorce Decree, Family Law, Financial Disputes, High-net-worth divorce, interim relief, Judicial Discretion, legal precedent, matrimonial property, protracted proceedings, Rule 43 rights, separation order, South Africa, spousal maintenance, strike date, Trust assets, trust law, vexatious litigation Unshackling Dead Marriages: TD v LD and Others (32195/2017) [2024] ZAGPJHC 751 (12 August 2024) – Reshapes High-Net-Worth Divorces in South Africa. Background: A Protracted Divorce Battle The case of TD v LD and Others (32195/2017) ZAGPJHC 751 (12 August 2024) highlights the complexities and challenges of high-net-worth divorces in South Africa.… READ MORE
07/08/2024 Bertus Preller Adversarial Legal System, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Costs, Divorce, Financial Disclosure, Hostile Family Lawyers, Maintenance, Procedure, Rule 43, Spousal Maintenance aggressive litigation tactics, asset depletion, child welfare, divorce process critique, exorbitant legal fees, financial disclosure, financial hardship, high-conflict divorce, interim relief, judicial case management, Legal Costs, legal reform, maintenance variation, Material change in circumstances, matrimonial property, minor child impact, prolonged litigation, Rule 43, South African Family Law A Decade of Divorce: L.S v J.S (23967/2012) [2024] ZAGPJHC 653 Exposes Flaws in South African Family Law (2 August 2024). Background: A 12-Year Divorce Battle Reaches New Heights The case of L.S v J.S (23967/2012) ZAGPJHC 653 (2 August 2024) presents a stark illustration of the perils of prolonged divorce… READ MORE
31/07/2024 Bertus Preller Actio communi dividundo, Adversarial Legal System, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Costs, Divorce, Hostile Family Lawyers, Marital Regimes, Rule 43 actio communi dividundo, best interests of the child, children's interests, costs order, divorce proceedings, equity, family disputes, Family Law, Gauteng Division, High Court, joint ownership, legal precedent, litigation conduct, matrimonial home, Property Division, property rights, punitive costs, Robson v Theron, Rule 43, scale B costs, South African Law, transfer of property, valuation Dividing the Family Home and Awarding Costs: N M v M M and Another (2023/008561) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1818 Balances Property Rights, Children’s Interests, and Litigation Conduct. The Actio Communi Dividundo: Terminating Joint Ownership During Divorce Proceedings In the recent case of N M v M M and Another (2023/008561) ZAGPJHC 1818 (24 July 2024), the Gauteng… READ MORE
29/06/2024 Bertus Preller Adversarial Legal System, Emotional Intelligence, Hostile Family Lawyers active listening, attorney well-being, Child Custody, client advocacy, Client Relationships, client satisfaction, communication skills, Conflict Resolution, courtroom performance, Divorce, emotional awareness, emotional intelligence, empathy, family disputes, Family Law, high-conflict cases, lawyer effectiveness, lawyer-client trust, Legal Education, Legal Ethics, legal outcomes, legal practice management, legal professionalism, Legal Strategy, Mediation, negotiation, professional development, self-regulation, stress management Mastering Emotional Intelligence: The Game-Changer for Family Lawyers. Emotional Intelligence: A Key Skill for Family Lawyers Family law practitioners, despite their best intentions and legal expertise, often fall prey to common pitfalls that can significantly impact their effectiveness… READ MORE
30/04/2024 Bertus Preller Adversarial Legal System, Children, Divorce, Hostile Family Lawyers, Maintenance, Settlement agreements attorney behavior, attorney-client relationship, case analysis, child maintenance, conflict resolution in family law, courtroom behavior, D v D, effective dispute resolution, emotive language, ethical practice, family court conduct, Family Law, family law attorneys, High Court Johannesburg, impact of decorum, judicial guidance, judicial opinions, legal decorum, Legal Ethics, legal professionalism, legal representatives, non-hostile conduct, professional behavior, settlement agreement, South African Family Law, strategic legal practice, ZAGPJHC 1688 Encouraging Decorum: The Importance of Non-Hostile Conduct Among Family Law Attorneys in D v D (2021/23816) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1688 (26 April 2024). Introduction In the case of D v D (2021/23816) ZAGPJHC 1688 (26 April 2024), the crux of the matter stemmed from the respondent's decision to issue a writ of execution… READ MORE
17/03/2024 Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Guardianship, Hostile Family Lawyers, Parental Rights, Views of the Child bias in evaluations, care and contact disputes, child best interests, child welfare, court reliance on experts, cultural influence, Custody Battles, ethical dilemmas, expert testimony ethics, expert witness objectivity, family dynamics, forensic assessments, forensic social workers, hired gun phenomenon, impartiality in assessments, judicial decisions, Legal Framework, legal outcomes, Legal Standards, mental health impact, peer review panels, professional development, professional integrity, psychological evaluations, Schneider case analysis, subjective interpretation Navigating the Battlefield: Overcoming the ‘Hired Gun’ Phenomenon in Forensic Child Care Assessments. Introduction In a typical case, let us consider a fictional scenario involving a forensic psychologist, Dr. Smith, who is hired to conduct a care and contact assessment for a care… READ MORE