M.E.M v T.C.M and Another (2502/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 2 (8 January 2019)

M.E.M v T.C.M and Another (2502/2018) [2019] ZAECGHC 2 (8 January 2019)

The court found that the joint estate had already been divided in accordance with the settlement agreement reached between the parties and incorporated into the divorce order. The applicant's offer to settle, accepted by the respondent, specifically addressed the division of the joint estate and the pension interests. The withdrawal of the applicant's counterclaim and the terms of the settlement indicated that no further division was contemplated. The authority of GN v JN was distinguished, as in that case the joint estate had not yet been divided, whereas in the present matter, the division was final. Therefore, the applicant was not entitled to a further share in the respondent's...

Citation
[2019] ZAECGHC 2
Parties
Applicant: M E M; Respondent: T C M; Respondent: Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 January 2019
Case Number
2502/2018
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination of Part B of Urgent Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Roberson
Legal Topics
Division of Joint Estate, Pension Interest, Divorce Act Section 7, Settlement Agreement, Forfeiture of Benefits
Family and Children Civil Procedure Division of Joint Estate Pension Interest Divorce Act Section 7 Settlement Agreement Forfeiture of Benefits

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M E M

Applicant

T C M

Respondent

Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination of Part B of Urgent Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to 50% of the respondent's pension interest after the division of the joint estate.
  2. 2 Whether the settlement agreement and subsequent court order preclude further division of pension interests.
  3. 3 Whether the authority of GN v JN applies to the present facts.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the joint estate had already been divided in accordance with the settlement agreement reached between the parties and incorporated into the divorce order. The applicant's offer to settle, accepted by the respondent, specifically addressed the division of the joint estate and the pension interests. The withdrawal of the applicant's counterclaim and the terms of the settlement indicated that no further division was contemplated. The authority of GN v JN was distinguished, as in that case the joint estate had not yet been divided, whereas in the present matter, the division was final. Therefore, the applicant was not entitled to a further share in the respondent's...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs, including the respondent's costs, if any, of the proceedings on 28 and 30 August 2018.