Lesotho Judgment

Court of Appeal

Monaphathi v Monaphathi (C of A (CIV) 16 of 1981) [1990] LSCA 22 (26 January 1990)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The trial court erred by awarding assets to the respondent based solely on who paid for them, rather than determining the value of the joint estate and the respective contributions of the parties as required by law. The correct approach is to value the joint estate at the date of divorce, ascertain each party's contributions, and distribute the estate proportionally or equally depending on the findings.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order (a) of the trial court is set aside.
  • Each party to pay his or her own costs of appeal.
  • Matter remitted to the trial court to determine the value of the joint estate at the date of divorce, the plaintiff's and defendant's respective contributions, and to distribute the estate accordingly.

02

Material facts

Parties

Sekhefu Monaphathi

Appellant Counsel: Mr. M. Matsau

'Mamatheali Ramonaphathi

Respondent Counsel: Mr. S. Mafisa

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Whether the trial court correctly implemented the order for forfeiture of benefits following divorce of parties married in community of property

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant challenged the manner in which the trial court gave effect to the forfeiture of benefits order, arguing that the division of property was not properly determined according to the parties' respective contributions.
Respondent
The respondent contended that the assets acquired with her own money should be awarded to her, supporting the trial court's approach.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Gates v Gates 1940 NPD 361; Hahlo, The South African Law of Husband and Wife, 4th ed.

    In community of property, assets and income fall into the joint estate by operation of law, and forfeiture of benefits must be determined by valuing the joint estate and the respective contributions of the parties.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The trial court erred by awarding assets to the respondent based solely on who paid for them, rather than determining the value of the joint estate and the respective contributions of the parties as required by law. The correct approach is to value the joint estate at the date of divorce, ascertain each party's contributions, and distribute the estate proportionally or equally depending on the findings.

Obiter and limits

  • It is misleading to speak of 'his' or 'her' money in a marriage in community of property, as all assets and income fall into the joint estate by operation of law.
  • Tracing assets to individual contributions runs counter to the notion of community.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

  • Order (a) of the trial court is set aside.
  • Each party to pay his or her own costs of appeal.
  • Matter remitted to the trial court to determine the value of the joint estate at the date of divorce, the plaintiff's and defendant's respective contributions, and to distribute the estate accordingly.

Source and reliance status

Court of Appeal

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court of Appeal

Judgment

[1990] LSCA 22

C of A (Civ) 16 of 1981

IN

T HE

L E S O T HO

C O U RT

OF

A P P E AL In the matter between:

S E K H E FU

M O N A P H A T HI A p p e l l a nt a nd ' M A M A T H E A L I RA M O N A P H A T HI R e s p o n d e nt H e ld at M a s e ru C o r a m: S c h u tz A a r on P l e w m an P. J . A. J . A.

J U D G M E NT S c h u t z, P. T he i s s ue t h at w as a r g u ed in t h is a p p e al w as w h e t h er t he m a n n er in w h i ch K h e o l a 'J g a ve e f f e ct to an o r d er f or f o r f e i t u re of b e n e f i t s, w h i ch o r d er he h ad g i v en c o n s e q u e nt u p on d i v o r c i ng t he p a r t i es w ho h ad b e en m a r r i ed in c o m m u n i ty of p r o p e r t y, w as c o r r e c t. T he o r d er w as m a de a g a i n st t he a p p e l l a nt ( t he h u s b a n d ). W h at K h e o la J d id is r e f l e c t ed in t he f o l l o w i ng p a s s a ge in h is j u d g m e n t: / " In t he ... - - " In t he p r e s e nt c a se t he j o i nt e s t a te c o n s i s ts of a f i v e - r o o m ed h o u se w i th f u r n i t u re and t h r ee m o t or v e h i c l e s. I h a ve not d e t e r m i n ed t he v a l ue of t he j o i nt e s t a te so as to d e f i ne t he p o r t i on w h i ch d e f e n d a nt w i ll f o r f e i t. H o w e v e r, t he p r o p e r ty has b e en d e s c r i b ed in in such d e t a il t h at I am of t he o p i n i on t h at I can d e f i ne w h at p o r t i on t he d e f e n d a nt s h a ll f o r f e i t. I t h i nk t he d e f e n d a nt m u st f o r f e it t he h o u s e, all f u r n i t u re and t he m o t or v e h i c le w h i ch t he p l a i n t i ff b o u g ht w i th h er own m o n e y ." The l e a r n ed j u d ge a q uo d o es not a

p p e ar to h a ve m a de a ny e x p r e ss f i n d i n gs on c r e d i b i l i ty a l t h o u gh t h e re w e re d i s p u t es as to w ho p a id f or w h a t, and as to t he m a n n er in w h i ch t he f u n ds of t he p a r t i es w e re or w e re not c o m m i n g l e d. I w o u ld p o i nt o ut t h at it can be m i s l e a d i ng to s p e ak of " h i s" or " h e r" m o n ey in a m a r r i a ge in c o m m u n i t y, w h e re by o p e r a t i on of law a u n i v e r s al p a r t n e r s h ip is c o n s t i t u t e d. H o w e v er t h at m ay b e, t he n o t i on of " h i s" or " h e r " m o n ey can be i m p o r t a nt in d e t e r m i n i ng w h at e a ch p a r ty c o n t r i b u t ed to t he p a r t n e r s h i p, a m a t t er t h at is r e l e v a nt to t he i m p l e m e n t a t i on of a f o r f e i t u re o r d e r. In G a t es v G a t es 1 9 40 N PD 361 at 3 6 4 -5 S e l ke J. s a i d: /"In o r d er ,., - - " In o r d er to d e c i d e, t h e r e f o r e, in a ny g i v en c a se w h e t h er t he d e c r ee of f o r f e i t u re o p e r a t es a n d, if s o, h o w, it is n e c e s s a ry to k n ow in t he f i r st p l a ce t he v a l ue of t he j o i nt e s t a te as it e x i s ts at t he d a te of t he o r d er f or d i v o r c e. It is t h en n e c e s s a ry to a s c e r t a in t he e x i s t i ng v a l ue to t he j o i nt e s t a te of t he c o n t r i b u t i o

ns r e s p e c t i v e ly m a de b y, or on b e h a lf of e a ch of t he s p o u s es If, a f t er s u ch p r o of h as b e en g i v e n, it a p p e a rs t h at t he e x i s t i ng v a l ue of t he d e f e n d a n t 's c o n t r i b u t i o ns is e q u a l, or g r e a t er t h a n, t h at of t he p l a i n t i f f 's t h en t h e re is no f o r f e i t u re in f a c t, a nd t he e x i s t i ng e s t a te is d i v i d ed b e t w e en t h em in e q u al s h a r e s, e x a c t ly as if no f o r f e i t u re h ad b e en d e c r e e d. If, on t he o t h er h a n d, t he v a l ue of t he c o n t r i b u t i o ns p r o v ed to h a ve b e en m a de b y, or on b e h a lf of t he p l a i n t i f f, e x c e e ds t h at p r o v ed to h a ve b e en m a de b y, or on b e h a lf of t he d e f e n d a n t, t h en t he f o r f e i t u re c o n s i s ts of h a lf of d i f f e r e n ce b e t w e en t he v a l u es t h us e s t a b l i s h e d ." / S e l ke J. ... - - S e l ke J. p r o c e e d ed (at 3 6 5) to d e al w i th t he c a se b e f o re h i m, w h e re at t he t i me of t he d i v o r ce t he v a l ue of t he j o i nt e s t a te w as w o r th less t h an t he sum of t he v a l ue of t he c o n t r i b u t i o n s. S u ch a s i t u a t i on c an a r i se b e c a u se of t he d e p r e c i a t i on of a s s e t s, or b e c a u se of t he e x p e n s es i n c u r r ed by t he s p o u s e

s. In s u ch a c a s e, S e l ke J h e l d, t he e x i s t i ng e s t a te w as to be d i v i d ed in t he m a n n er s t a t ed a b o v e, a c c o r d i ng to . c o n t r i b u t i o n s. He t h en r a i s ed t he q u e s t i on w h at w o u ld h a p p e n, if, b e c a u se of a p p r e c i a t i on of a s s e t s, t he v a l ue of t he e s t a te w as w o r th m o re t h an t he sum of t he v a l u es of t he c o n t r i b u t i o n s. He s u g g e s t ed t h at t he v a l ue of t he a p p r e c i a t i on s h o u ld be d i v i d ed e q u a l l y. I can s ee no l o g ic in t h is v i ew and a d o pt t he v i ew of H a h lo T he SA Law of H u s b a nd and W i f e. 4 ed 4 3 6 -7 t h at in s u ch a c a se a l so t he w h o le e s t a te r e m a i n i ng s h o u ld be d i v i d ed in a c c o r d a n ce w i th t he r e s p e c t i ve c o n t r i b u t i o ns of t he p a r t i e s, p r o v i d ed t h at t he i n n o c e nt p a r t y 's c o n t r i b u t i on w as g r e a t e r .. A p p l y i ng t he p r i n c i p l es s et o ut in G a t es and H a h l o, it is c l e ar t h at o n ly in t he s i m p l e st of c a s es c o u ld t he a p p r o a ch l e a ve o ut t he t h r ee v a l u a t i o ns e n v i s a g ed in G a t e s' c a s e, a n d, a p p a r e n t ly a s s u m i ng t h at t he r e s p o n d e n t 's (the w i f e ' s) c o n t r i b u t i on w as g r e a t e r, a l l o ws h er

t he a s s e ts b o u g ht w i th " h e r" m o n e y. T he v e ry s i m p le e x a m p le is t h i s: t he p a r t i es m a r ry on d ay o n e. T he w i fe (the i n n o c e nt p a r ty to b e) / c o n t r i b u t es - 5 - c o n t r i b u t es a new R o l ls R o y c e. The h u s b a nd c o n t r i b u t es an old B e e t l e. T h at is a l l. On day t wo t h ey a re d i v o r c ed and a f o r f e i t u re o r d er is d e c r e e d. So bad h as b e en t he o ne day of m a r r i a ge t h at t he s p o u s es h a ve i n c u r r ed no e x p e n s e s. Nor h a ve t he t wo c a rs had a c h a n ce to a p p r e c i a te or d e p r e c i a t e. In such a c a se o ne can s ee at o n ce t h at t he w i fe c o n t r i b u t ed a g r e a t er s h a r e, and it is c l e ar t h at t he f o r f e i t u re r u le will be s e r v ed by a w a r d i ng her t he Rolls and him t he B e e t l e. But t he m o m e nt t he e x a m p le is c o m p l i c a t e d, as m u st o c c ur a f t er t he p a s s a ge of s o me y e a r s, such a s i m p le s o l u t i on is not p o s s i b l e. S o me a s s e ts will h a ve d e p r e c i a t e d, s o me may h a ve a p p r e c i a t e d, e x p e n s es will h a ve been i n c u r r e d, and so o n. The u ps and d o w ns of t he j o i nt e s t a te and t he r e a s o ns t h e r e f or a re u s u a l ly i r r e l e v a n t. W h at m a t t e rs is t he v a l ue of w h

at is left at t he t i me of t he d i v o r c e. Any a t t e m pt to t r a ce " h i s" or " h e r" a s s e ts as e m a n a t i ng from " h i s" or " h e r" c o n t i r u b i o ns runs c o u n t er to t he n o t i on of c o m m u n i t y. For e x a m p l e, if t he w i fe r e c e i v es a s a l a ry s he r e c e i v es it on b e h a lf of t he j o i nt e s t a t e, and it f a l ls into t h at e s t a te at o n ce by v i r t u re of o p e r a t i on of law. It d o es not m a t t er w h at bank a c c o u nt s he p a ys it i n t o, or w h e t h er s he pays it into a bank a c c o u nt at a l l. The s a me g o es for t he h u s b a n d. It f o l l o ws t h at o r d er (a) m a de by t he t r i al c o u rt m u st be set a s i d e. /It w o u ld ... - - It w o u ld be h e l p f ul and w o u ld r e d u ce c o s ts if t he p a r t i es o b t a i n ed or e s t a b l i s h ed t he t h r ee v a l u a t i o ns a l r e a dy r e f e r r ed t o, a n d, if p o s s i b l e, a g r e ed on s o me or all of t h e m, b e f o re c o m i ng b e f o re t he t r i al C o u rt a g a i n , to w h i ch C o u rt t h is m a t t er w i ll h a ve to be r e m i t t e d. At t he end of t he h e a r i ng of t he a p p e al M r. P h e k o, f or t he s u c c e s s f ul a p p e l l a n t, f a i r ly c o n c e d ed t h at e a ch p a r ty s h o u ld p ay his or h er o wn c o s ts of a p p e a l. In t he r e s u lt t he

a p p e al s u c c e e ds and o r d er ( a) m a de by t he t r i al c o u rt is s et a s i d e. E a ch p a r ty is to p ay h is or h er o wn c o s ts of a p p e a l. T he m a t t er is r e m i t t ed b a ck to t he t r i al c o u rt w h e re t he l e a r n ed j u d ge is t o: ( a) D e t e r m i ne t he v a l u es o f: ( i) T he j o i nt e s t a te at t he d a te of t he d i v o r c e; ( i i) The p l a i n t i f f 's c o n t r i b u t i o ns to t he j o i nt e s t a te s t a n te m a t r i m o n i o; ( i i i) The d e f e n d a n t 's c o n t r i b u t i o ns to t he j o i nt e s t a te s t a n te m a t r i m o n i o; ( b) In t he e v e nt of t he p l a i n t i f f 's c o n t r i b u t i on to t he j o i nt e s t a te a m o u n t i ng to less t h an h a lf of t he s a m e, to a w a rd h a lf of t he s a me to h e r; ( c) In t he e v e nt of t he p l a i n t i f f 's c o n t r i b u t i on to t he j o i nt e s t a te a m o u n t i ng to m o re / t h an ... - - t h an h a lf of t he s a m e, to d i s t r i b u te t he s a me in p r o p o r t i on to t he c o n t r i b u t i o ns of t he p a r t i e s. ( d) In g i v i ng e f f e ct to (b) and (c) a b o ve t he l e a r n ed j u d ge is to u t i l i ze such p r o c e d u r es and m e t h o ds of d i s t r i b u t i on as may be f i t t i ng and such as t he law a l l o w s. I a g r ee I a g r ee ( S i g n e d) W. P. S c h u tz P r e s i d e nt ( S i g n e d) S. A a r on J u d ge of A p p e al ( S i g n e d) C. P i e m an J u d ge of Appeal D e l i v e r ed at M a s e ru t h is 2 6 th day of J a n u a ry 1 9 9 0. For t he A p p e l l a n t: M r. M. M a t s au For t he R e s p o n d e n t : M r. S. M a f i sa

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Gates v Gates 1940 NPD 361

Case cited

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.