D v D (20212/2014) [2016] ZAGPJHC 341 (15 December 2016)

D v D (20212/2014) [2016] ZAGPJHC 341 (15 December 2016)

The court found that there had been a material change in the wife's financial circumstances, as she was now generating significant rental income from properties and receiving financial support from her partner. The husband was also providing adequately for the major child, and his financial position had changed due to reduced business income. The wife's cohabitation with Mr Lategan did not, in itself, extinguish the husband's duty of support pending the finalisation of the divorce. However, the wife's improved financial position justified a reduction in the husband's maintenance obligations. The court ordered a reduction in maintenance for the minor children, relieved the husband from...

Citation
[2016] ZAGPJHC 341
Parties
Applicant: L S D; Respondent: C A D
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 December 2016
Case Number
20212/2014
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Rule 43(6) Variation Application
Outcome
Variation of the Rule 43 order granted in part; maintenance for minor children reduced, maintenance for wife revoked, certain obligations retained and others revoked.
Judges
T D Vilakazi
Legal Topics
Rule 43 Variation, Maintenance Obligations, Duty of Support, Cohabitation Effects, Interim Relief
Family and Children Civil Procedure Rule 43 Variation Maintenance Obligations Duty of Support Cohabitation Effects Interim Relief

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L S D

Applicant

C A D

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Rule 43(6) Variation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there has been a material change in the financial circumstances of the parties justifying a variation of the Rule 43 order.
  2. 2 Whether the husband's maintenance obligations towards the wife and minor children should be reduced or revoked.
  3. 3 Whether the wife's cohabitation with a third party affects her entitlement to maintenance.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there had been a material change in the wife's financial circumstances, as she was now generating significant rental income from properties and receiving financial support from her partner. The husband was also providing adequately for the major child, and his financial position had changed due to reduced business income. The wife's cohabitation with Mr Lategan did not, in itself, extinguish the husband's duty of support pending the finalisation of the divorce. However, the wife's improved financial position justified a reduction in the husband's maintenance obligations. The court ordered a reduction in maintenance for the minor children, relieved the husband from...

Court Disposition

Variation of the Rule 43 order granted in part; maintenance for minor children reduced, maintenance for wife revoked, certain obligations retained and others revoked.

Orders

  • The husband must pay maintenance of R2,500 per month per minor child with effect from 30 December 2016.
  • The husband is relieved from his obligation to pay R6,000 per month as maintenance for the wife with effect from 30 December 2016.