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
30/09/2025 Bertus Preller Alimony, Civil contempt South Africa, Contempt of Court, Costs, Maintenance, Procedural Law, Rule 43, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Spousal Maintenance, Unaffordability defence, Variation Rule 43(6) affordability defence evidence, civil contempt South Africa, constitutional rights maintenance, contempt of court, contribution to legal costs, Equality of Arms, Fakie test contempt, financial disclosure requirements, Gauteng High Court Johannesburg, joint estate litigation, judicial integrity, late filing affidavits, maintenance arrears, mala fide conduct, procedural abuse family law, punitive costs order, Rule 43 proceedings, Rule 43(6) variation, section 10 dignity, section 34 access to justice, section 9 equality, spousal maintenance non-payment, suspended sentence contempt, T.F.C v B.J.C 2025, unaffordability defence, Uniform Rules of Court, warrant of arrest maintenance, wilful non-compliance, ZAGPJHC 956 When “I Cannot Afford It” Fails: Contempt, Constitutional Rights and Procedural Abuse in T.F.C v B.J.C (21300/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 956 (25 September 2025). From Rule 43 Relief to Repeated Refusal: The Factual Matrix of Mounting Non-Compliance The factual backdrop to this contempt application reveals a distressing pattern of deliberate defiance that began almost… READ MORE
10/09/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Costs, Divorce, Divorce summons prerequisite, Maintenance, Procedural Law, Procedure, Rule 43, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Rule 58 2018 Rule 43 amendment, child custody applications, Court Jurisdiction, divorce attorneys, divorce law procedure, divorce practice, divorce summons prerequisite, divorce summons timing, family court procedures, family law practitioners, High Court Gauteng, in limine objections, interim applications, interim maintenance, interim relief requirements, legal costs contribution, legal procedural requirements, litigation prerequisites, matrimonial action pending, matrimonial disputes, matrimonial interim relief, matrimonial law compliance, matrimonial proceedings, pendente lite applications, pending divorce requirement, Procedural Compliance, procedural defects, Rule 43 applications, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court No Divorce Summons, No Rule 43 Relief: A.C v H.C (2024/148225) [2025] ZAGPJHC 741 (28 July 2025) Confirms Procedural Prerequisites for Matrimonial Interim Applications. Factual Background and Procedural History The case A.C v H.C (2024/148225), decided on 28 July 2025 in the Gauteng Local Division, Johannesburg, addressed a Rule 43 application for interim relief… READ MORE
30/07/2025 Bertus Preller Divorce, Divorce summons South Africa, Irregular proceedings, Mediation, Procedural Law, Rule 30(2)(b) application, Rule 41A mediation notice Alternative Dispute Resolution, court rules, curable defect, Divorce Law, divorce litigation, divorce proceedings, Divorce process, divorce summons South Africa, divorce summons validity, Family Court, family disputes, Growthpoint case, irregular proceedings, legal remedies, Legal Technicalities, litigation procedure, mediation consideration, mediation notice omission, mediation notice requirements, non-compliance Rule 41A, Procedural Compliance, procedural defects, procedural irregularity, Rule 30 application, Rule 30(2)(b) application, Rule 41A mediation notice, South African courts, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court Rule 41A Mediation Notices in Divorce: Why Missing Notices Don’t Kill Your Case. Introduction Rule 41A of the Uniform Rules of Court, introduced in 2020, mandates that litigants consider mediation at the inception of litigation. In divorce actions, this means a plaintiff must… READ MORE
02/07/2025 Bertus Preller Abuse of Process, Adversarial Legal System, Costs, Divorce, Family Law Court System South Africa, Procedural Law, Procedure, Punitive Cost Orders, Rule 30A, Uniform Form Rules of Court Afrocentrics case, attorney costs orders, Bloem case, civil procedure, condonation applications, court deadlines, court rules compliance, de bonis propriis costs, Family Court, family law proceedings, Helen Suzman Foundation case, High Court Johannesburg, late filing affidavits, legal practitioner conduct, litigation management, motion proceedings, Multi-Links case, Parental Responsibilities, Procedural irregularities, procedural non-compliance, professional conduct, Rule 27, Rule 28, Rule 30A, Rule 6, South African Law, supplementary affidavits, Uniform Rules of Court When Procedure Trumps Substance: Dissecting Rule 30A Non-Compliance in N.S v A.D (2022/257) [2025] ZAGPJHC 632 (20 June 2025). Factual Background: A Tale of Procedural Non-Compliance in Family Law Proceedings The factual matrix in N.S v A.D presents a striking illustration of how procedural non-compliance can derail even the… READ MORE
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
29/06/2025 Bertus Preller Divorce, Procedural Law, Recission of Divorce Orders, Urgency costs in urgent divorce application, curator ad litem, divorce settlement dispute, E.E v T.C.E, East Rock Trading case, Family Advocate investigation, family advocate report, family law procedure, fraud in divorce proceedings, Gauteng Division Pretoria, Lindeque v Hirsch case, minor children divorce court, non-disclosure in divorce, non-joinder, Pretoria High Court, procedural fairness, rescinding divorce agreement, rescission of divorce order, rescission under common law, SARS v Hawker Air Services, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court, urgency in divorce, urgent child residency change, urgent divorce application, urgent High Court application, urgent motion divorce, urgent rescission case, ZAGPPHC 492 Urgency Dismissed: Lessons from E.E v T.C.E (113234/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 492 (16 May 2025) on Rescission, Disclosure and Children’s Rights in Divorce Proceedings. The Factual Matrix: A Mother’s Urgent Attempt to Set Aside a Divorce Settlement Agreement This case arose from an urgent application brought by the applicant, E.E, who sought to have… READ MORE
21/08/2024 Bertus Preller Adversarial Legal System, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Costs, Family Law Court System South Africa, Joint Decision Making, Parental Coordinator, Schools, Urgency Alternative Dispute Resolution, attorney-client scale, best interests of the child, Child Custody, co-parenting, communication skills, costs order, facilitative mediation, Family Advocate, legal precedent, Mediation, parenting coordinator, Rule 41A, school choice, Self-Created Urgency, South African Family Law, Uniform Rules of Court, urgent court application, Western Cape High Court Urgent Co-Parenting Battles: A Lesson in Patience from D.D v I.L and Another (16939/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 215 (20 August 2024). Background: A Preschool Predicament In the Western Cape High Court case of D.D v I.L and Another (16939/2024) ZAWCHC 215 (20 August 2024), we encounter a poignant example of how… READ MORE
19/08/2024 Bertus Preller Costs, Divorce, Domicile, International Divorce adverse inferences, affidavits, attachment orders, Burden of Proof, costs, credibility, domicile, ex parte orders, full disclosure, incola, international litigation, jurisdiction, Legal Fees, motion proceedings, peregrinus, Plascon-Evans rule, reconsideration applications, residence, South African Law, Uniform Rules of Court Domicile Dilemma: Unraveling Jurisdictional Complexities in J.M v N.C (2023/00100) [2024] ZAGPJHC 762 (16 August 2024). Background: The Legal Dispute Between J.M and N.C The case of J.M v N.C (2023/00100) ZAGPJHC 762 (16 August 2024) originated from a dispute over legal fees between J. Mahomed,… READ MORE
27/07/2024 Bertus Preller Alimony, Divorce, Financial Disclosure, Interim Maintenance, Maintenance, Rule 43, Rule 43 Cost Contributions, Spousal Maintenance court judgments, Divorce, divorce litigation, Family Law, financial assessment, financial disclosure, full disclosure, interim maintenance, interim relief, legal precedent, Legal proceedings, marital property, matrimonial assets, matrimonial disputes, Mediation, Rule 43, South Africa, spousal support, Uniform Rules of Court Full Disclosure and Reasonableness: Key Lessons from M.Y v J.Y (2024/013982) [2024] ZAGPJHC 684 in Rule 43 Applications (26 July 2024). Background: A Short-Lived Marriage Leads to Rule 43 Application The case of M.Y v J.Y (2024/013982) ZAGPJHC 684 (26 July 2024) revolves around a Rule 43 application filed by the… READ MORE