E.S.M v A.T.M (09183/2017) [2023] ZAGPJHC 738 (26 June 2023)

E.S.M v A.T.M (09183/2017) [2023] ZAGPJHC 738 (26 June 2023)

The court found that the only issue was the interpretation and application of section 9(1) of the Divorce Act. The applicant contributed only R20,000 to the estate, and the court exercised its discretion judicially, considering the duration of the marriage, circumstances of breakdown, and misconduct. The authorities cited confirm that forfeiture cannot be ordered against a party's own contributions. The applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or any compelling reason for leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 738
Parties
Applicant: E S M; Respondent: A T M
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 June 2023
Case Number
09183/2017
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order in Divorce Action
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
M A Makume
Legal Topics
Divorce Act Section 9, Forfeiture of Benefits, Pension Interest, Matrimonial Home, Costs Order
Family and Children Divorce Act Section 9 Forfeiture of Benefits Pension Interest Matrimonial Home Costs Order

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E S M

Applicant

A T M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Order in Divorce Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has reasonable prospects of success on appeal against the order of forfeiture of benefits.
  2. 2 Whether the court erred in its interpretation and application of section 9(1) of the Divorce Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to a greater share in the matrimonial home and pension fund.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the only issue was the interpretation and application of section 9(1) of the Divorce Act. The applicant contributed only R20,000 to the estate, and the court exercised its discretion judicially, considering the duration of the marriage, circumstances of breakdown, and misconduct. The authorities cited confirm that forfeiture cannot be ordered against a party's own contributions. The applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success or any compelling reason for leave to appeal. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the respondent's taxed party and party costs.