02/07/2025 Bertus Preller Appeal, Divorce, Procedural Law, Procedure, Rule 42 variation application accrual system, appellate procedures, collateral attack judgments, common mistake divorce, costs follow the cause, divorce decree variation, ex tempore judgment, final judgment finality, fraudulent misrepresentation, High Court North West Division, joint estate division, judicial officers function, legal certainty principles, legal representation errors, litigation finality, marriage out of community of property, matrimonial disputes, Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984, Matrimonial Property Regime, pleadings integrity, pre-nuptial contract, procedural missteps, property division claims, Rule 42 variation application, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court, Zweni case finality When Variation Applications Fail: The Limits of Rule 42 Common Mistake in K.P.M v O.L.M and Another (Reasons) (1751/2008) [2025] ZANWHC 103 (17 June 2025). The Genesis of the Dispute: A Marriage Out of Community of Property Revisited The roots of this protracted legal dispute stretch back to 7 February 1991, when the applicant and… READ MORE
06/08/2024 Bertus Preller Divorce, Procedural Law, Procedure, Recission of Divorce Orders attorney negligence, bona fide defence, civil litigation, contradictory evidence, costs order, court appearance, default judgment, Divorce, forfeiture, High Court Judgment, Legal Representation, matrimonial benefits, procedural missteps, rescission application, Rule 31(2), Rule 42(1)(a), Saloojee principle, South African Law, unopposed divorce Divorce, Dismissal, and Dueling Affidavits: How Attorneys’ Missteps Doomed a Rescission Bid in S.P.M v L.M (Born M) (56859/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 729 (2 August 2024). Background: The Divorce Proceedings and Rule 27 Application The case of S.P.M v L.M (Born M) (56859/2021) ZAGPPHC 729 stems from a divorce action initiated in November 2021. The parties… READ MORE
12/02/2024 Bertus Preller Alimony, Arrears, Children, Divorce, Maintenance, Muslim Marriages, Procedural Law, Rule 43, Spousal Maintenance audi alteram partem, civil marriage, contempt of court, court discretion, COVID-19 impact, divorce proceedings, family law disputes, financial hardship, Gois v Van Zyl, High Court judgement, interim maintenance, legal advice, Legal Costs, legal principles, Legal Representation, maintenance obligations, MEC v Ikamva Architects, procedural missteps, R.A v F.A, rescission application, Rule 43(6) order, Rule 45A, Sharia Law, South African Family Law, Strime v Strime, suspension of maintenance orders, Uniform Rules of Court, Urgent Application, Whitfield v Van Aarde Understanding the Suspension of Maintenance Orders: Insights from – R.A v F.A (14491/2020; 14490/2020; 19594/2021) [2024] ZAWCHC 35 (9 February 2024) – LEKHULENI J. Maintenance Disputes: Navigating Rule 43(6) Orders In the significant legal decision of R.A v F.A, delivered on 9 February 2024 by Lekhuleni J in the Western Cape High Court, the… READ MORE