23/09/2026 Bertus Preller Divorce, Finality in litigation, matrimonial asset division, matrimonial litigation, Once-and-for-all rule, Piecemeal litigation, Procedure, South African divorce law, Suitable alternative accommodation, Urgent divorce applications divorce litigation strategy, family law practitioners, family law South Africa, finality in litigation, finality principle, fragmented litigation, High Court divorce cases, household furniture dispute, interim relief divorce, L.C v C.B.C, L.C v C.B.C NO and Others, legal finality, litigation costs divorce, marital home occupation, matrimonial home, matrimonial litigation, matrimonial property disputes, once-and-for-all rule, piecemeal litigation, repeat litigation, South African divorce law, South African family law cases, suitable alternative accommodation, temporary accommodation divorce, Thulare J, urgent applications family law, urgent divorce applications, Western Cape High Court, ZAWCHC 549 Finality in High-Conflict Divorce Litigation: The Once-and-for-All Rule in L.C v C.B.C NO and Others (229199/26) [2026] ZAWCHC 549 (22 September 2026). The facts: a temporary move from the matrimonial home becomes a further legal dispute In L.C v C.B.C NO and Others (229199/26) ZAWCHC 549 (22 September 2026), the Western Cape… READ MORE
13/09/2026 Bertus Preller Appeal, Appealability, Civil procedure., Condemnation application, Default judgment., Divorce, Divorce settlement agreement, Leave to appeal Superior Courts Act, Nullity of divorce order, Procedure, Recission, Separation of issues, Settlement agreements accrual claims, appealability, B v B, B v B 2026 ZASCA 115, civil procedure, condonation application, default judgment, Divorce Decree, divorce settlement agreement, final court order, functus officio, jurisdiction, lapsed appeal, matrimonial litigation, Matrimonial Property Act, nullity of court order, procedural fairness, prospects of success, reinstatement of appeal, rescission of judgment, Rule 33(4), Rule 42(1)(a), separation of issues, settlement agreement, South African divorce law, special leave to appeal, Superior Courts Act, Supreme Court of Appeal, Zweni test Crossing the Rule 33(4) Line: When a Divorce Order Becomes a Nullity in B[…] v B[…] (562/2025) [2026] ZASCA 115 (7 September 2026). The Facts and Procedural History: From Settlement Agreement to a Lapsed Appeal The litigation in B v B (562/2025) ZASCA 115 (7 September 2026) arose from a divorce that became… READ MORE
12/04/2026 Bertus Preller Child born outside marriage, Child Maintenance, Children, Divorce, In Community of Property, Maintenance Court, Maintenance order enforcement, Rule 43, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance child born outside marriage, community of property divorce, costs in the divorce, divorce litigation South Africa, divorce proceedings South Africa, EH v SH, extra-marital child maintenance, family law South Africa, Forfeiture of benefits, Gauteng High Court, interim maintenance, interlocutory divorce relief, joint estate, joint property income, maintenance duty stepchild, minor child support, NM v BM, pendente lite maintenance, pendente lite relief, rental income divorce, Reyneke v Reyneke, Rule 43, Rule 43 limitations, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, step-parent maintenance duty, trial court jurisdiction, Uniform Rules of Court, ZAGPJHC When Love Goes Wrong and the Law Says No: The Limits of Rule 43 and a Husband’s Failed Bid for Maintenance and Rental Income — C.M.N v N.N (2025/177461) [2026] ZAGPJHC 320 (31 March 2026). The Facts: An Unemployed Husband, an Extra-Marital Child, and a Contested Rental Income This is an opposed application brought in terms of Rule 43 of the Uniform Rules of Court… READ MORE
16/03/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Appeal, Arrear Maintenace, Arrear Maintenance, Arrear maintenance claims, Best Interests of the Child, Child Maintenance, Children, Divorce, Duty to maintain, Interim Maintenance, Interlocutory applications, Irregular proceedings, Leave to appeal Superior Courts Act, Maintenance, Maintenance Court, Parental Rights, Pendente Lite, Procedural Law, Punitive costs orders, Rule 43, Rule 43 Appeal, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, Rule 58, Spousal Maintenance, Stepparents, Variation Rule 43(6) accrual system, appealability, blended families, common law development, Divorce, divorce proceedings, duty of support, Family Law, Govindjee AJA, interests of justice, interim maintenance, interim relief, jurisdictional threshold, maintenance pendente lite, non-appealability, out of community of property, piecemeal appeals, Rule 43, Rule 43(6), SCA, section 16(3), section 173 Constitution, South African divorce law, statutory bar, stepchildren, stepparent maintenance, Superior Courts Act, Supreme Court of Appeal, Western Cape High Court Blended Families, Bitter Disputes and a Blocked Appeal: The SCA Draws the Line on Rule 43 Appealability in B.E v N.T and Others (505/2025) [2026] ZASCA 25 (11 March 2026). The Facts: A Blended Family, a Breakdown, and a Battle Over Stepchildren's Maintenance BE and NT married on 27 April 2018, out of community of property subject to the accrual… READ MORE
04/02/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Costs, Family Advocate, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Mediation, Non-disclosure consequences, Pendente Lite, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Uberrimae fidei matrimonial proceedings, Uniform Form Rules of Court adverse costs orders family law, clean hands doctrine, contribution to legal costs, contribution towards costs requirements, custody and contact disputes, Du Preez v Du Preez, duty of disclosure in divorce, duty of support spouses, equitable relief divorce, false affidavits maintenance, Family Advocate role, family law dishonesty, financial disclosure matrimonial proceedings, interim maintenance South Africa, maintenance court jurisdiction, matrimonial property disputes, Mediation in Certain Divorce Matters Act, non-disclosure consequences, Office of Family Advocate, perjury in divorce proceedings, prima facie case legal costs, Rule 43 applications, Rule 43 costs orders, Rule 43(5) discretion, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance pendente lite, uberrimae fidei matrimonial proceedings, Uniform Rules of Court Rule 43, Van Rippen v Van Rippen When Clean Hands Matter: The Fatal Cost of Non-Disclosure in Rule 43 Applications – S.J. J v M.M. J (2025/056214) [2026] ZAGPJHC 57 (2 February 2026). Factual Matrix: A Rule 43 Application Gone Wrong The parties married on 13 October 2012 in Johannesburg, out of community of property with the accrual system. Two minor children were… READ MORE
08/12/2025 Bertus Preller Accrual system, Clean Break Principle, Cohabitation, Costs, Direct financial contributions, Division of Estate, Divorce, Divorce Act 70 of 1979, EB v ER Constitutional Court, Equitable redistribution, Marriage, Marriage equality, matrimonial asset division, Out of community of property, Procedure, Punitive Cost Orders, Redistribution Claim, Rehabilitative maintenance, Section 7(2) maintenance, Section 7(3) Divorce Act, Section 7(4) contributions, Universal Partnership accrual system, antenuptial contract without accrual, Attorney and Client Costs, Beaumont v Beaumont, clean break principle, cohabitation before marriage, direct financial contributions, domestic partnership, EB v ER Constitutional Court, equitable redistribution, estate valuation disputes, family law redistribution, full court binding precedent, household duties, indirect contributions to estate, matrimonial asset division, Matrimonial Property Regime, out of community of property, Ponelat v Schrephfer, post-separation conduct, redistribution claims, rehabilitative maintenance, section 7(2) maintenance, section 7(3) Divorce Act, section 7(4) contributions, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, trust asset disclosure, universal partnership Beyond Marriage: 30 Years, 40% Redistribution and the Universal Partnership Principle – E.L.M v L.M (9360/2022P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 127 (5 December 2025). Facts and Matrimonial Background: A 30-Year Relationship The parties in this matter were married out of community of property without the accrual system on 27 March 1999, following a six-year… READ MORE
25/09/2025 Bertus Preller Amendment of Pleadings, Constitutional law, Divorce, Divorce summons South Africa, Marriage, Procedural Law, Procedure, Punitive Cost Orders, Rule 28 amendments, Section 7 Matrimonial Properties Act, Section 7(3) Divorce Act 1984 cut-off date, amendment applications, Antenuptial Contracts, case management, constitutional challenge, Constitutional Court, constitutional development, costs orders, divorce proceedings, EB v ER judgment, equitable relief, Family Law, Judicial Discretion, M.S v E.S, matrimonial contributions, matrimonial property law, Mpumalanga High Court, Msibi AJ, out of community of property, pleadings amendment, procedural amendments, procedural compliance bertus preller, redistribution orders, Rule 28 amendments, RVB v JVB, section 7(3) Divorce Act, South African divorce law Amendment Revolution: How M.S v E.S (3091/2021) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 96 (23 September 2025) Transforms Redistribution Claims Post-EB. Factual Matrix and Procedural History: From Closed Pleadings to Constitutional Development The parties in this matter were married out of community of property, excluding the accrual system, pursuant to a… READ MORE
15/08/2025 Bertus Preller Adultery, Divorce, Forfeiture of Benefits, Forfeiture patrimonial benefits, Matrimonial property forfeiture, Paternity Fraud, Substantial misconduct adultery divorce law, candidate attorney resources, divorce act section 9, divorce appeal court, divorce law practitioners, divorce proceedings South Africa, DNA paternity fraud, extramarital affairs legal consequences, family law South Africa, financial misconduct divorce, forfeiture application evidence, forfeiture patrimonial benefits, GEPF forfeiture, Government Employees Pension Fund, High Court Limpopo, joint estate division, law student materials, marital breakdown irretrievable, marriage community property, matrimonial assets protection, matrimonial misconduct, matrimonial property forfeiture, pension benefits forfeiture, pension interest forfeiture, perjury maintenance court, South African divorce law, substantial misconduct, substantial misconduct definition, undue benefit test Beyond Adultery: When Substantial Misconduct Justifies Total Forfeiture – M.C.M v M.S.M (Appeal) (HCA16/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 153 (11 August 2025). Factual Matrix: A Marriage Marred by Infidelity and Deception The parties entered into a marriage in community of property on 19 November 2015, with a significant age disparity - the… READ MORE
13/07/2025 Bertus Preller Alter ego trust, Divorce, Res judicata divorce, Stay of execution, Vexatious litigation abuse of process, alter ego trust, attorney own client costs, civil procedure divorce, CRW v LMW 2025, divorce enforcement, divorce law precedent, divorce trust ruling, family court Cape Town, family law trusts, Le Grange J, legal costs divorce, litigation misconduct, res judicata divorce, rescission of judgment, Rule 45A, Rule 46A, security for costs, South African case law, South African divorce law, stay of execution, trust abuse divorce, trust execution divorce, vexatious litigant South Africa, vexatious litigation, vexatious Proceedings Act, Western Cape High Court, ZAWCHC 279 Lawfare in the Divorce Courts: C.R.W v L.M.W and Another (12866/2014) [2025] ZAWCHC 279 (2 July 2025) Unmasks Vexatious Litigation and Trust Abuse. The Factual Backdrop: A Relentless Legal Battle Post-Divorce The saga in C.R.W v L.M.W and Another (12866/2014) ZAWCHC 279 (2 July 2025) represents one of the most protracted and acrimonious… READ MORE
29/06/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Alienation, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Costs, Divorce, Family Advocate, Joint Decision Making, Maintenance, Parental Alienation, Parental Rights, Rule 43, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Spousal Maintenance, Variation Rule 43(6) B.P.M v J.L.M, best interests of the child, child contact, co-parenting, Colman v Colman, Contact rights, custody variation, divorce litigation, Du Preez v Du Preez, Family Advocate, family advocate report, family law South Africa, forensic psychologist, High Court Limpopo, interim maintenance, Mangena AJ, parental alienation, parenting plans, PAS, Rule 43 Application, Rule 43(6), shared residency, Soller v G, South African divorce law, spousal maintenance, spousal support South Africa, Variation Application, Visser v Visser, ZALMPPHC 96 Parental Alienation, Prolixity and the Best Interests Principle in B.P.M v J.L.M (1909/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 96 (13 May 2025). Background and Factual Matrix of the Rule 43(6) Dispute The matter before the court in B.P.M v J.L.M (1909/2024) ZALMPPHC 96 (13 May 2025) concerned a Rule 43(6) application brought… READ MORE