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
26/05/2026 Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Custody, Economic precarity, Family Advocate, Jurisdiction of convenience, Ordinary residence of child, Primary residence dispute, Psychological vulnerability, Relocation, Section 28 Constitution, Section 29 Children's Act, Unilateral relocation best interests of the child, BLFM v GJM, child relocation Eastern Cape, Contact rights, Coopers v Deutsche Gesellschaft, custody and care, economic precarity, expert evidence family law, Family Advocate recommendation, family law South Africa, FS v JJ, Gauteng Division Johannesburg, High Court jurisdiction children, JS v WF, judicial discretion best interests, jurisdiction of convenience, MV Pasquale Della Gatta, NAN v CN, ordinary residence of child, parental rights and responsibilities, primary residence dispute, psychological vulnerability, relocation dispute, section 20 Children's Act, section 21 Children's Act, section 28(2) Constitution, Section 29 Children's Act, SH v MLH, Wilson J judgment Jurisdiction Is Not a Border Post: Section 29 of the Children’s Act Reconsidered in H.M.M v D.M (2025/140422) [2026] ZAGPJHC 506 (19 May 2026). The Facts: A Relocation, an Expert Report, and a Jurisdictional Challenge The applicant, HMM, and the respondent, DM, were in a relationship for seven years and lived together for much… READ MORE