21/04/2025 Bertus Preller Division of Estate, Divorce, Forfeiture of Benefits, Pension Funds, Recission of Divorce Orders community of property, court discretion, divorce act section 9, divorce costs, divorce judgment, divorce proceedings, divorce settlements, extramarital affairs, family law South Africa, financial abuse marriage, financial misconduct, Forfeiture of benefits, Gauteng High Court, High Court Judgment, justice kooverjie, legal precedent, Marital Assets, marriage breakdown, matrimonial property, partial rescission, pension claims, Pension Forfeiture, pension interests divorce, Property Division, South African divorce law, spousal misconduct, substantial misconduct, undue benefit, wijker test Marriage Misconduct Costs Husband Dearly: Court Orders Forfeiture of Property and Pension Benefits in M.J.L v L.O.L (22341/19; A288/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 331 (27 March 2025). Background: The Marriage and Subsequent Divorce Proceedings The recent High Court judgment in M.J.L v L.O.L (22341/19; A288/2023) ZAGPPHC 331 (27 March 2025) provides valuable insights into how South African… READ MORE
09/04/2025 Bertus Preller Alimony, Costs, Divorce, Maintenance, Rule 43, Rule 43 Cost Contributions accrual system, Acting Judge Pretorius, constitutional rights in divorce, contribution to legal costs, Divorce Litigation Costs, divorce proceedings, duty of support, equality before the law, Equality of Arms, expert fees in divorce, Family Law, financial disclosure, financial non-disclosure, financial transparency, forensic accounting, Gauteng High Court, high net worth divorce, interim maintenance, legal precedent, maintenance pendente lite, matrimonial property, Qatar Airlines pilot, Rule 43 Application, Rule 43 principles, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, standard of living, stay-at-home spouse High Court Judgment Clarifies Rule 43 Relief in Wealthy Divorces: M.C D.C.R v A.P.W.R (2024 075727) [2025] ZAGPJHC 307 (19 March 2025). Background to the Rule 43 Application: Interim Maintenance Pending Divorce The case of M.C D.C.R v A.P.W.R (2024 075727) ZAGPJHC 307 (19 March 2025) revolves around a Rule 43 application… READ MORE
30/01/2025 Bertus Preller Costs, Divorce, Financial Disclosure, Procedural Law, Section 7 Matrimonial Properties Act accrual system, acting justice friedman, asset declaration, Asset Disclosure, beneficial ownership, catch-me-if-you-can principle, company assets, constitutional powers, corporate structures, disclosure obligations, divorce litigation, divorce procedure, divorce proceedings, divorce tactics, financial disclosure, financial transparency, Gauteng High Court, High Court Judgment, interlocutory applications, Judicial Discretion, legal precedent, matrimonial law, matrimonial property, Matrimonial Property Act, Practice Directive, Rule 33(4), Rule 43, section 7 notice, separation application, South African Law, Trust assets Playing Hide and Seek with Assets? High Court Says ‘Game Over!’ – D.M v D.M (2021 043212) [2025] ZAGPJHC 31 (28 January 2025). The Novel Question: When Must a Spouse Comply with a Section 7 Notice? When it comes to financial disclosure in divorce proceedings, some spouses treat their assets like a magician's… READ MORE
15/11/2024 Bertus Preller Abuse, Costs, Defamation, Revenge Porn civil damages quantum, civil remedies, cyber harassment, cyber violence remedies, cybercrime South Africa, cybersecurity jurisprudence, digital abuse precedent, digital evidence law, digital harassment damages, digital privacy law, digital rights South Africa, Facebook harassment, Gauteng High Court, image-based abuse, internet privacy law, intimate image abuse, Justice Mia judgment, online defamation, online harassment damages, online privacy rights, online protection precedent, privacy breach compensation, privacy litigation breakthrough, privacy violation, protection orders, psychological damages, revenge porn damages, social media abuse judgment, social media defamation, social media law Face(book) the Music: Justice Mia’s R4.3 Million Digital Privacy Judgment in KS v AM and SHM (2021/28121) [2024] ZAGHC. High Court Awards Landmark R4.3 Million in Revenge Porn Case In a watershed judgment that's giving social media abusers a very expensive wake-up notification, the Gauteng Local Division of the… READ MORE
12/10/2024 Bertus Preller Costs, Divorce, Procedural Law, Separation Applications asset dissipation, Asset Division, attorney-client scale, business interests, community of property, costs order, court ruling, Divorce, evidentiary rules, Gauteng High Court, hearsay evidence, inadmissible evidence, joint estate, Legal Requirements, matrimonial dispute, Matrimonial Property Act, prejudice, prima facie case, Section 20, South Africa, Urgent Application, urgent relief, ZAGPPHC Divorce Drama Derailed: BTTM v NKM (054684 2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 992 Exposes Pitfalls of Hasty Matrimonial Asset Division – (1 October 2024). Background: A Marriage in Community of Property Heads for Divorce In the bustling corridors of the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria, a matrimonial dispute unfolded that would… READ MORE
05/08/2024 Bertus Preller Abuse, Adultery, Adversarial Legal System, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Children, Costs, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Forfeiture of Benefits, Infidelity, Pension Funds, Reasons for Dicorce court discretion, Divorce, Divorce Act, evidence, financial transparency, forfeiture, Gauteng High Court, joint estate, Judge Wanless, legal precedent, litigation, marriage, matrimonial property, pension interest, pleadings, Property Division, South Africa, spousal contribution, substantial misconduct Forfeiture of Benefits in Divorce: Lessons from T.N v S.N (14166/2019) [2024] ZAGPJHC 703 (24 July 2024). Background of the T.N v S.N Divorce Case The case of T.N v S.N (14166/2019) ZAGPJHC 703 (22 July 2024) involves a divorce action heard in the Gauteng High Court,… READ MORE
23/07/2024 Bertus Preller Contempt of Court, Financial Disclosure, Maintenance, Rule 43 contempt of court, Court Order Compliance, divorce proceedings, Family Law, financial transparency, Gauteng High Court, interim order, judicial authority, maintenance payments, mala fides, Rule 43, South African Law, Suspended Sentence, wilful disobedience Contempt of Court in Divorce Proceedings: Lessons from L.M.G V J.M.G (124145/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 672 (9 July 2024). The Importance of Obeying Court Orders in South Africa In the recent High Court judgment of L.M.G v J.M.G (124145/2023) ZAGPPHC 672 (9 July 2024), Judge Swanepoel emphasised the critical… READ MORE
22/02/2024 Bertus Preller Appeal, Children, Mootness, Parental Rights, Procedural Law, Procedure best interests of the child, child custody appeal, child-centric approach, Children’s Court Randburg, contact order disputes, court's role in child welfare, custody and care arrangements, evolving family law practices, Family Advocate role, family dispute resolution, family law implications, forensic investigation for child's welfare, Gauteng High Court, interdisciplinary approach in custody cases, interim legal orders, judicial discretion in family cases, KA v KN, legal advocacy in custody cases, legal challenges in separation, legal precedents in custody cases, legal principles in custody, legal strategies in family law., mootness in law, new evidence on appeal, paramountcy principle in child law, Parental Rights, procedural norms in appeals, professional legal analysis, South African Family Law Navigating Child Custody Appeals: Insights from: KA v KN (A2023/055189) [2024] ZAGPJHC 147 (21 February 2024) and the Paramountcy of the Child’s Best Interests. In a case heard by the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg, an appeal was lodged against a contact order originally granted by the Children’s Court in Randburg.… READ MORE
23/01/2024 Bertus Preller Arrears, Children, Contempt of Court, Divorce, Guardianship, Maintenance, Marriage, Parental Rights Adherence to Court Orders, Attorney and Client Costs, Child's Welfare, Child's Best Interests, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Constitutional Violation, Contact rights, Contempt of Court Orders, Court Directives, Custodial Sentence, Emotional Strain, Gauteng High Court, Justice Phahlane, Legal Practitioners' Duty, Legal Recourse, Legal System Integrity, maintenance obligations, minor child, Mosopa Order, non-compliance, Parental Responsibilities, Parental Rights, Psychological Impact, Repeated Defiance, Rule of Law, Separation, South African Legal Framework, Urgent Application, Voster Order Justice Prevails: A Landmark Twelve-Month Sentence Upholding the Child’s Best Interests. – B.M.G.S v M.B.S and Others (26675/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 24 (8 January 2024). Introduction In this case presided over by Justice Phahlane, the applicant, Mr. S, approached the Gauteng High Court on an urgent basis. The case centred around the contempt of two… READ MORE