E S v M S ([T] I 2802 of 2010) [2011] NAHC 101 (1 April 2011)

E S v M S ([T] I 2802 of 2010) [2011] NAHC 101 (1 April 2011)

The court found that the defendant committed adultery with Shakeel Ahmed, was the sole cause of the breakdown of the marriage, contributed little to the joint estate, and should forfeit the benefits of the marriage in community of property. The defendant's counter-claim was dismissed for lack of evidence. The settlement agreement on custody and maintenance of the children was made an order of the court. The defendant's claim for spousal maintenance was rejected due to lack of evidence and her gainful employment.

Citation
[2011] NAHC 101
Parties
Plaintiff: E N S; Defendant: M S
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
1 April 2011
Case Number
[T] I 2802 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Divorce / Judgment After Trial and Partial Settlement
Outcome
Plaintiff granted final order of divorce; defendant forfeits benefits of marriage in community of property; custody and maintenance settled; defendant's counter-claim dismissed; costs awarded to plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Adultery, Custody, Maintenance, Forfeiture of Benefits, Costs
Source Language
English
Family Law Divorce Adultery Custody Maintenance Forfeiture of Benefits Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E N S

Plaintiff

M S

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Divorce / Judgment After Trial and Partial Settlement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant committed adultery justifying a divorce
  2. 2 Whether the defendant should forfeit the benefits of the marriage in community of property
  3. 3 Custody and maintenance of minor children

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the defendant committed adultery with Shakeel Ahmed, was the sole cause of the breakdown of the marriage, contributed little to the joint estate, and should forfeit the benefits of the marriage in community of property. The defendant's counter-claim was dismissed for lack of evidence. The settlement agreement on custody and maintenance of the children was made an order of the court. The defendant's claim for spousal maintenance was rejected due to lack of evidence and her gainful employment.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff granted final order of divorce; defendant forfeits benefits of marriage in community of property; custody and maintenance settled; defendant's counter-claim dismissed; costs awarded to plaintiff.

Orders

  • Final order of divorce granted to plaintiff.
  • Defendant forfeits benefits of marriage in community of property, subject to specific property and asset transfers as tendered.