M v M (62488/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 220 (15 March 2017)

M v M (62488/15) [2017] ZAGPPHC 220 (15 March 2017)

The court found that the appellant failed to prove the commencement value of his estate at the time of marriage, and that the respondent was entitled to her full accrual benefit. The existence of conflicting judgments regarding the interpretation of section 6 of the Matrimonial Property Act was considered a compelling reason to grant leave to appeal on the reserved issues, except for the rectification claim, which was found to have no reasonable prospects of success. The court corrected a patent error in the original order regarding the amount payable to the respondent, ensuring it reflected the correct calculation of accrual. Leave to appeal was granted on all reserved issues except...

Citation
[2017] ZAGPPHC 220
Parties
Plaintiff: M; Defendant: M
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 March 2017
Case Number
62488/15
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Divorce and Patrimonial Consequences
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted on all reserved issues except the rectification claim; costs to be costs in the appeal.
Judges
Opperman
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property Act, Antenuptial Contract Rectification, Forfeiture of Benefits, Divorce Act Section 9, No Fault Divorce, Costs in Appeal
Family and Children Civil Procedure Matrimonial Property Act Antenuptial Contract Rectification Forfeiture of Benefits Divorce Act Section 9 No Fault Divorce Costs in Appeal

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

Parties

M

Plaintiff

M

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Divorce and Patrimonial Consequences

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted regarding the reserved issues following the divorce judgment.
  2. 2 Whether the interpretation of section 6 of the Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 warrants leave to appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's claim for rectification of the antenuptial contract has reasonable prospects of success.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the appellant failed to prove the commencement value of his estate at the time of marriage, and that the respondent was entitled to her full accrual benefit. The existence of conflicting judgments regarding the interpretation of section 6 of the Matrimonial Property Act was considered a compelling reason to grant leave to appeal on the reserved issues, except for the rectification claim, which was found to have no reasonable prospects of success. The court corrected a patent error in the original order regarding the amount payable to the respondent, ensuring it reflected the correct calculation of accrual. Leave to appeal was granted on all reserved issues except...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted on all reserved issues except the rectification claim; costs to be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal to the Full Court of the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria is granted in respect of all reserved issues except the rectification claim.
  • Leave to appeal is refused in respect of the rectification claim.