Monaphathi v Monaphathi (C of A (CIV) 16 of 1981) [1990] LSCA 22 (26 January 1990)
- Citation
- [1990] LSCA 22
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Lesotho
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Case number
- C of A (CIV) 16 of 1981
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Case number
- C of A (CIV) 16 of 1981
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
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. Mafisa03
Procedural history
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
Legal principles
- 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.
Court of Appeal
Judgment
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
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.