20/01/2026 Bertus Preller Accrual Calculation, Accrual Calculator, Accrual claims, Accrual system, Alimony, Asset Disclosure, Costs, Divorce, Exceptional circumstances separation, Financial Disclosure, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, matrimonial asset division, Matrimonial Properties Act, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, section 10 MPA, Separation Applications, Separation of issues, Spousal Maintenance accrual system divorce proceedings, antenuptial contract accrual system, balance of convenience separation, bifurcated divorce proceedings, cost of separation applications, Denel v Vorster separation principles, divorce accrual claim, exceptional circumstances separation, expeditious disposal litigation, financially vulnerable spouse, formal tenders divorce, full disclosure matrimonial assets, Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act, maintenance security life policy, matrimonial property act section 7, matrimonial property disclosure duties, post-divorce maintenance uncertainty, prejudice to respondent spouse, procedural protection vulnerable spouse, Rule 33(4) separation of issues, Rule 43 interim relief, section 10 MPA deferred payment, section 4(2) divorce act, South African divorce law 2026, spousal maintenance claim, strike date accrual calculation, upfront payment accrual, Western Cape High Court family law, Wille J divorce judgment Why Formal Tenders Matter: Separation Refused Without Security for Vulnerable Spouse in AMG and Another v TSG (2025/057077) [2026] ZAWCHC 6 (19 January 2026). Factual Matrix: A Marriage Breakdown Complicated by Accrual and Maintenance Claims The matter before Wille, J concerned a marriage of over three decades that had irretrievably broken down, but in… READ MORE
17/01/2026 Bertus Preller Abuse, Appeal, Contempt of Court, Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998, Interim Protection Order, Interim relief with no final effect, Irreparable harm test, Procedural Law, Qwelane test coercion property sale, contempt of court divorce, contempt proceedings enforcement, divorce decree enforcement, divorce property disputes, Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998, domestic violence protection orders, domestic violence warrant execution, economic abuse definition, exceptional circumstances appeal, grave injustice test, High Court Gauteng Division, interim interdict appealability, interim interdicts South Africa, interim relief with no final effect, irreparable harm test, leave to appeal interim relief, marital home sale dispute, property sale cooperation, property sale disputes divorce, protection order breach, Qwelane test, section 1 Domestic Violence Act, South African Family Law, Springs Domestic Violence Court, VM v JM 2025, warrant of arrest domestic violence, Wilson J judgment, ZAGPJHC 1269 When Interim Interdicts Cannot Be Appealed: Domestic Violence Warrants and Property Sales in V.M v J.M (2025/203538) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1269 (18 December 2025). Background and Factual Matrix: The Domestic Violence Warrant and Property Sale Dispute The matter before Wilson J arose from an application by JM, the respondent, for leave to appeal against… READ MORE
17/01/2026 Bertus Preller Abuse, Contumacious conduct, Costs, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Domestic Violence, Emotional Abuse, Financial Abuse, Forfeiture of Benefits, Forfeiture patrimonial benefits, Harassment, In Community of Property, Marital misconduct, Matrimonial property forfeiture, Physical Abuse, Psychological Abuse, Punitive costs orders, Sexual Abuse, Substantial misconduct, Substantial misconduct, Verbal Abuse costs in divorce, discretion of court, divorce proceedings South Africa, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, duration of marriage, Engelbrecht v Engelbrecht, financial delinquency, financial irresponsibility, Forfeiture of benefits, interim protection orders, marital breakdown, marriage in community of property, Mashola v Mashola, matrimonial property, municipal debt, no-fault divorce, patrimonial benefits, pension benefit misconduct, section 9(1) Divorce Act, spousal abuse, substantial misconduct, transfer of property, two-stage approach, unduly benefited test, value judgment, Wijker principles When Domestic Violence and Financial Delinquency Justify Forfeiture: Analysis of W.M.C.M v U.A.M (7390/2018) [2026] ZAGPPHC 5 (12 January 2026). The Factual Matrix: A Pattern of Misconduct and Financial Delinquency The parties in this matter were married in community of property on 16 December 2000. The marriage endured for approximately… READ MORE
16/01/2026 Bertus Preller Adultery, Children, Divorce, Divorce Act section 9, Forfeiture of Benefits, Forfeiture patrimonial benefits, In Community of Property, Matrimonial property forfeiture, Pension Funds, Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956, Pension interest, Substantial misconduct, Substantial misconduct, Undue benefit test adultery extra-marital relationship, balancing contributions misconduct, Botha v Botha forfeiture, BS v PS isolated misconduct, credibility assessment divorce proceedings, cumulative misconduct assessment, discretion costs divorce matters, divorce irretrievable breakdown, domestic contributions recognition, duration of marriage neutral factor, family law Gauteng Division, forfeiture patrimonial benefits, homemaker contributions divorce, humiliation spouse dignity, marriage in community of property, Mashola v Mashola holistic approach, Municipal Gratuity Fund, non-financial contributions marriage, partial forfeiture pension only, pension interest forfeiture, procreation with third party, public humiliation Facebook, sale joint estate property, section 9 Divorce Act, social media pregnancy announcement, substantial misconduct divorce, two-step forfeiture test, undue benefit divorce, value judgment forfeiture orders Forfeiture of Pension Benefits for Adultery, Procreation and Public Humiliation via Social Media: E.M v S.M (096891/2024) [2026] ZAGPPHC 8 (12 January 2026). Factual Background: Extra-Marital Relationship and the Birth of a Third Child The parties in this matter were married in community of property on 10 January 2011. Their marriage, which lasted… READ MORE
15/01/2026 Bertus Preller 1996 Hague Convention, Abducting parent defences, Abduction, Article 3 Hague Convention, Best interests of child short-term, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Cross-border parental rights recognition, Curator Ad Litem, Custody, Dependency model habitual residence, Domicile, Grave risk psychological harm, Habitual Residence, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Inter-provincial custody, International child retention, Parental Alienation, Parental responsibility Italian law, Parental Rights, Relocation, Unmarried fathers, Unmarried Parents 1996 Hague Convention, acquiescence defence child abduction, Article 13 defences, Article 3 Hague Convention, best interests of child short-term, Central Authority South Africa, child custody Switzerland, cross-border parental rights recognition, curator ad litem appointment, custody rights unmarried fathers, dependency model habitual residence, family law international jurisdiction, Geneva habitual residence, grave risk psychological harm, habitual residence determination, Hague Convention child abduction, international child retention, international family law, Italian Civil Code Article 316, parental responsibility Italian law, parental rights operation of law, protective measures return orders, return order conditions, settled purpose intention residence, Swiss Civil Code parental rights, Swiss Federal Act Private International Law, unmarried parents custodial rights, wrongful removal children, wrongful retention South Africa Unmarried Parents’ Custodial Rights and Cross-Border Habitual Residence: Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa v MV and Another (1396/2024) [2025] ZASCA 197 (18 December 2025). Factual Background: From Geneva to Gauteng – The Retention of a Minor Child The factual matrix in this matter presents a textbook illustration of how international child retention disputes arise… READ MORE
15/01/2026 Bertus Preller Accrual Calculation, Accrual Calculator, Accrual claims, Accrual system, Divorce, Eviction, PIE Act, Procedural Law, Procedure accrual claim, accrual disputes, accrual system, constitutional arguments, contingent rights, conveyancing law, divorce and property, divorce litigation, doctrine of notice, eviction defence, eviction proceedings, family law practitioners, finality in litigation, leave to appeal, matrimonial home, matrimonial property, PIE Act, property ownership, property transactions, reconsideration applications, registered ownership, section 17(2)(f), South African Family Law, spousal occupation, Superior Courts Act, Supreme Court of Appeal, third party purchasers, transfer of property Accrual Rights, Ownership and Eviction: Clear Limits on Spousal Claims Before Divorce — J.M.M and Another v Cara Dorothy Masureik and Others (807/2024) [2026] ZASCA 1 (8 January 2026). Factual Background and Procedural History The matter in J.M.M and Another v Cara Dorothy Masureik and Others arose from protracted and unresolved divorce proceedings between the first applicant and her… READ MORE
06/01/2026 Bertus Preller Abduction, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Family law international travel, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Holiday Travel, International relocation, International Travel, International travel with minors, Relocation, Section 26B Citizenship Act, South African passport requirements best interests of child, citizenship offences major citizens, court authorization travel minors, custody international relocation, Da Silva Salie J, Department of Home Affairs, dispensing parental consent, divorce order contact rights, Family Advocate investigation, family law international travel, family law practitioners South Africa, immigration compliance minor children, international travel with minors, minor child travel authorization, parental rights international travel, passport non-compliance consequences, passport renewal minor child, section 26B Citizenship Act, section 28(2) Constitution, sibling relationships contact disputes, South African passport requirements, travel safeguards return flights, upper guardian powers, Western Cape High Court Section 26B Citizenship Act Does Not Apply to Minors: A.T.A v L.A.A (2025/246332) [2025] ZAWCHC 597 (19 December 2025) Clarifies International Travel Authorisation. Introduction The Western Cape High Court recently delivered an important judgment clarifying the application of passport and citizenship requirements to minor children travelling internationally. In A.T.A v L.A.A (2025/246332) ZAWCHC… READ MORE
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
13/12/2025 Bertus Preller Adult Children, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Arrear Maintenance Variation, Child Maintenance, Children, Contempt of court maintenance, Costs, Divorce order interpretation, Locus standi adult dependent children, Maintenance, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Calculator, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Major children maintenance rights, Natural guardianship termination, Parent standing enforcement, Post-divorce maintenance enforcement, Procedural Law, Punitive Cost Orders, Section 6(3) Divorce Act, Self-supporting children definition, Settlement agreement drafting adult dependents tertiary education, ancillary maintenance orders, arrear maintenance claims, Bannatyne contempt proceedings, best interests child section 28(2), Bursey common law duty support, civil claim reimbursement, contempt of court maintenance, divorce order interpretation, divorce settlement clauses, Endumeni interpretation principles, family law practitioners, locus standi adult dependent children, Maintenance Act enforcement, maintenance order enforcement, major children maintenance rights, natural guardianship termination, parent standing enforcement, payment recipient designation, PL v YL settlement agreements, post-divorce maintenance enforcement, primary caregiver designation, section 6(3) Divorce Act, section 8 Divorce Act variation, self-supporting children definition, settlement agreement drafting, Western Cape Full Court, Z v Z distinction Parents Stripped of Enforcement Rights for Adult Children’s Maintenance Post-Divorce: A Critical Analysis of R.L v J.F.D.L (A128/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 585 (12 December 2025). The Facts: Post-Divorce Enforcement of Maintenance for Adult Dependent Children The appellant and respondent were married in community of property for thirty years before divorcing in the High Court on… READ MORE