blog-image

Breaking Down the M.C.N v G.M.L.N (Born M.) (1629/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 516 (7 June 2024) Divorce Case: Forfeiture of Patrimonial Benefits in South Africa.

Case Summary In the case of M.C.N v G.M.L.N (Born M.) (1629/2022) ZAGPPHC 516 (7 June 2024) the parties were married in community of property in 2000. The marriage lasted…

READ MORE

blog-image

Divorce in South Africa: A Comprehensive Graphical Comparison of the 2022 Divorce Statistics.

Comparing the data on divorces from the "Marriages and divorces, 2021" and "Marriages and divorces, 2022" statistical releases, several interesting trends and differences emerge. In 2021, there were 18,208 divorces…

READ MORE

blog-image

Deciphering Divorce: A Rule 43 Ruling on Maintenance and a Contribution to Legal Costs – M Q v V S (0221062023) 2024 ZAGPJHC 188 (23 February 2024).

Introduction to the Application for Maintenance and Legal Contributions In this Rule 43 application the court was presented with an intricate application concerning the financial sustenance and legal cost contributions…

READ MORE

blog-image

Infidelity, Abuse, and Forfeiture: Behind the Gavel – Deciphering the Role of Personal Conduct in Divorce Outcomes in South African Courts. – M.F.B v J.B (5674/2016) [2024] ZALMPPHC 7 (24 January 2024).

Background and Claims In the case presided over by Naude-Odendaal J, the Plaintiff M.F.B filed for divorce against the Defendant J.B on 23 November 2016. The Plaintiff sought a decree…

READ MORE

blog-image

Marriage Misconduct and Asset Forfeiture: A Pivotal Ruling in Z v Z (34253/2010) [2024] ZAGPJHC – 4 (10 January 2024).

Case Overview In the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Johannesburg, the case of Z v Z (Case No: 34253/2010) was presided over by Adams J. The judgment, delivered…

READ MORE

blog-image

Rule 43: Navigating Maintenance and Financial Fairness in South African Divorce Proceedings and Adult Dependent Children.

Y.V.D.M v W.P.V.D.M (2021/43213) ZAGPJHC 1280 (9 November 2023) Introduction Case Background: This case involved an application under Rule 43 of the Uniform Rule of Court, related to a pending…

READ MORE