01/11/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Children, Contribution towards costs divorce, Costs, Divorce, Duty to maintain, Equality of arms divorce, Financial disclosure divorce, Financial non-disclosure, Forensic accountant divorce costs, Interim relief divorce, Maintenance, Maintenance pendente lite, Non-disclosure consequences, Procedural Law, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance accrual claim divorce, adverse inference non-disclosure, AF v MF, C.G.S v J.H.S, Cary v Cary, contribution towards costs divorce, costs reserved divorce, Divorce Act section 7(2), duty of support spouses, equality of arms divorce, family law South Africa, financial disclosure divorce, forensic accountant divorce costs, H v H 2023, industrial psychologist divorce, interim relief divorce, maintenance pendente lite, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, Northern Cape High Court Rule 43, POPIA divorce disclosure, Rule 43 Application, Rule 43 contribution to costs, Rule 43(6) further contribution, senior counsel divorce costs, sole shareholder company divorce, spousal maintenance South Africa, Stanton J, Van Rippen v Rippen, ZANCHC 92 Equality of Arms in Rule 43: Northern Cape High Court Rejects the R25,000 First-Day-of-Trial Practice for a Contribution to Costs: C.G.S v J.H.S (2026-133005) [2026] ZANCHC 92 (30 October 2026). This case concerns a Rule 43 application in the Northern Cape Division in which the only issue left for decision was the quantum of a husband's contribution towards his wife's… READ MORE
27/10/2026 Bertus Preller Accrual system, Appeal, Deed of settlement, Divorce, Divorce settlement agreement, Divorce settlement agreement, Maintenance, Rule 43, Rule 43 orders, Settlement agreements accrual claim, accrual system, declaratory order, Deed of Settlement, Dispute of Fact, divorce order incorporating settlement, divorce settlement agreement, Endumeni interpretation, foreseeable dispute of fact, Free State High Court, Full Bench appeal, interpretation of settlement agreement, KIV v CJV, lifelong maintenance, Loubser J, maintenance termination date, motion proceedings, party and party costs, pendente lite maintenance, Plascon-Evans rule, post-divorce maintenance, referral to oral evidence, rehabilitative maintenance, Rule 43 Order, scale B counsel fees, spousal maintenance, Wightman v Headfour, without prejudice letters, ZAFSHC 465 When Pendente Lite Means Exactly That: The Full Bench Ends a Post-Divorce Maintenance Dispute in KIV v CJV (A151/2025) [2026] ZAFSHC 465 (15 October 2026). This case concerns a divorced husband who asked the Free State High Court to declare that his duty to pay his former wife R25 000 per month in spousal maintenance… READ MORE
27/10/2026 Bertus Preller Attachment of bank account, Execution debtor notice, Incorporeal property attachment, Interim maintenance enforcement, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Sheriff notice of attachment, Writ of execution arrear maintenance recovery, attachment of bank account, Congo Oil v Identiguard, divorce execution procedure, Exclusive Access Trading v Bouwer, execution debtor notice, frozen bank account divorce, Gauteng Division Johannesburg, incorporeal property attachment, interim maintenance enforcement, irregular attachment, Jaftha v Schoeman, judicial oversight execution, Koutroulis v ABSA, Lipshitz AJ, M.T.J v E.C.J, party and party costs scale A, Riordan v First National Bank, Rule 43 maintenance, Rule 45(8), rule 6(12) urgency, setting aside attachment, sheriff notice of attachment, South African Family Law, Stratgro Capital v Lombard, TBP Building v Chetty, Uniform Rules of Court, Writ of Execution, ZAGPJHC 1216 No Notice, No Attachment: Freezing a Bank Account to Enforce Rule 43 Maintenance in M.T.J v E.C.J (2026-060216) [2026] ZAGPJHC 1216 (23 October 2026). This case concerns the attachment of a husband's bank account to enforce an unpaid Rule 43 maintenance order. The Johannesburg High Court set the attachment aside because the sheriff had… READ MORE
27/10/2026 Bertus Preller Appeal, Child Maintenance, Children, Costs, Divorce, Maintenance, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Court, Maintenance Court, Maintenance court jurisdiction to vary High Court orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Appeal, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders Carstens v Carstens, child maintenance after divorce, common-law duty of support, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, Divorce Amendment Act 1 of 2024, divorce decree silent on maintenance, Full Bench appeal, Harwood v Harwood, Herfst v Herfst, interim maintenance, K.O v M.O, Loots AJ, LS v GAS, M.V v E.V, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, maintenance court enquiry, maintenance pendente lite, P v R, retrospective maintenance order, Rule 43, Rule 43 order lapse, S.C.K v B.K, section 16 Maintenance Act, section 6 Divorce Act, Thulare J, upper guardian, Variation Application, Western Cape High Court, ZAWCHC 629 When the Decree Falls Silent: A Rule 43 Order Does Not Survive Divorce – S.C.K v B.K (A143/2026) [2026] ZAWCHC 629 (23 October 2026). This Full Bench appeal in the Western Cape Division decides whether an interim maintenance order granted under Rule 43 continues to operate after a decree of divorce that says nothing… READ MORE
03/10/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Best Interests of the Child, Care and Contact, Child Maintenance, Childcare Expert, Children, Children's matters South Africa, Civil contempt South Africa, Contact Rights, Contempt of Court, Costs, Curator Ad Litem, Divorce, Forensic psychologist mandate, Hired Gun Expert, Maintenance, Parental rights and responsibilities, Pendente Lite, Primary Residence, Primary residence dispute, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Unlawful retention of a child, Urgency, Urgent applications, Variation Rule 43(6) best interests of the child, breach of court order, child abuse allegations, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Contact rights, court-appointed expert, curator ad litem, divorce litigation, DTL v GB, expert bias, family advocate report, family law South Africa, forensic psychologist mandate, Gauteng High Court Johannesburg, hired gun expert, interim care and contact, parental alienation, parental rights and responsibilities, pendente lite order, primary care, primary residence, Rule 43 variation, Rule 43(6), Rule 67A(3), scale C costs, self-help, sheriff enforcement, unlawful retention of a child, Urgent Application Self-Help Never Pays: Unlawful Retention of a Child and the Limits of Rule 43(6) — L.C.E v C.E (2026/226362) [2026] ZAGPJHC 1070 (29 September 2026). Neutral Citation: E v E (2026-226362) ZAGPJHC --- (29 September 2026) The Facts: A Four-Year-Old Caught in the Crossfire of a Brutal Divorce The parties in L.C.E v C.E (2026/226362)… 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
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
12/04/2026 Bertus Preller Child born outside marriage, Child Maintenance, Children, Divorce, In Community of Property, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Rule 43, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance child born outside marriage, community of property divorce, costs in the divorce, divorce litigation South Africa, divorce proceedings South Africa, EH v SH, extra-marital child maintenance, family law South Africa, Forfeiture of benefits, Gauteng High Court, interim maintenance, interlocutory divorce relief, joint estate, joint property income, maintenance duty stepchild, minor child support, NM v BM, pendente lite maintenance, pendente lite relief, rental income divorce, Reyneke v Reyneke, Rule 43, Rule 43 limitations, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, step-parent maintenance duty, trial court jurisdiction, Uniform Rules of Court, ZAGPJHC When Love Goes Wrong and the Law Says No: The Limits of Rule 43 and a Husband’s Failed Bid for Maintenance and Rental Income — C.M.N v N.N (2025/177461) [2026] ZAGPJHC 320 (31 March 2026). The Facts: An Unemployed Husband, an Extra-Marital Child, and a Contested Rental Income This is an opposed application brought in terms of Rule 43 of the Uniform Rules of Court… READ MORE
02/04/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Children, Costs, Divorce, Financial non-disclosure, Maintenance, Non-disclosure consequences, Punitive costs orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Variation Rule 43(6) 2-2-3 contact schedule, care and contact, child maintenance, costs contribution, divorce costs, divorce proceedings, Fairways Business Trust, Family Advocate, family trust, financial non-disclosure, forensic auditor, Genius Academy, interim maintenance, legal costs contribution, material change of circumstances, matrimonial property, medical aid maintenance, minor child, patriarchal misdirection, pende lite maintenance, right of first refusal, Rule 43, Rule 43(6), social worker report, South African Family Law, spousal maintenance, sworn valuator, Thembalethu High Court, VW Touareg When Opacity Meets Obligation: Spousal Maintenance, Financial Non-Disclosure and the Limits of Rule 43 — J.V.D.B v O.V.D.B (234/25) [2026] ZAWCHC 136 (23 March 2026). The Facts and Background to the Rule 43(6) Application The matter of J.V.D.B v O.V.D.B (234/25) ZAWCHC 136 (23 March 2026) came before Thulare J in the High Court of… READ MORE