P.A.F v S.C.F (AR485/19) [2020] ZAKZDHC 42 (25 August 2020)

P.A.F v S.C.F (AR485/19) [2020] ZAKZDHC 42 (25 August 2020)

The court dismissed the application to admit further evidence, finding no exceptional circumstances and that the legal opinion was irrelevant and inadmissible. Condonation for late filing was refused due to inadequate explanation for delays and attorney error, with the appellant failing to demonstrate diligence or compelling attempts to expedite the record. On the merits, the court upheld the inclusion of the trust donation and loan repayment in the accrual calculation, finding they were made with fraudulent intent to deprive the respondent of her claim. The court confirmed the date of disposition as the correct date for exchange rate calculation, rejected the challenge to the annual...

Citation
[2020] ZAKZDHC 42
Parties
Appellant: P[….] A[….] F[….]; Respondent: S[….] C[….] F[….]
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 August 2020
Case Number
AR485/19
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Orders of the Court a Quo; Applications for Condonation and Admission of Further Evidence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; applications for admission of further evidence and condonation refused; costs awarded against the appellant.
Judges
Kruger, Steyn, D Pillay
Legal Topics
Accrual System, Dissipation of Assets, Condonation, Maintenance Order, Costs Award
Family and Children Civil Procedure Accrual System Dissipation of Assets Condonation Maintenance Order Costs Award

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 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P[….] A[….] F[….]

Appellant

S[….] C[….] F[….]

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Orders of the Court a Quo; Applications for Condonation and Admission of Further Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be granted leave to admit further evidence on appeal.
  2. 2 Whether condonation for non-compliance with rules 49(6) and 49(7) should be granted.
  3. 3 Whether the court a quo erred in including the donation to the trust and loan repayment in the accrual calculation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court dismissed the application to admit further evidence, finding no exceptional circumstances and that the legal opinion was irrelevant and inadmissible. Condonation for late filing was refused due to inadequate explanation for delays and attorney error, with the appellant failing to demonstrate diligence or compelling attempts to expedite the record. On the merits, the court upheld the inclusion of the trust donation and loan repayment in the accrual calculation, finding they were made with fraudulent intent to deprive the respondent of her claim. The court confirmed the date of disposition as the correct date for exchange rate calculation, rejected the challenge to the annual...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; applications for admission of further evidence and condonation refused; costs awarded against the appellant.

Orders

  • The application to lead further evidence in terms of s 19 of the Superior Courts Act is dismissed with costs.
  • The application for condonation is dismissed with costs, including the respondent's costs on appeal.