U v U (4739/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 215 (28 November 2016)

U v U (4739/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 215 (28 November 2016)

The court found that the applicant is entitled to maintenance pendente lite, including provision for relocation costs, but not as a separate lump sum. Instead, the court ordered unequal monthly payments to accommodate the applicant's initial relocation needs, in line with the principle established in Zwiegelaar v Zwiegelaar (SCA). The respondent's financial disclosures were found to be incomplete, but the court was satisfied that he could afford the ordered payments. The applicant was also entitled to be retained on the respondent's medical aid scheme, to use the Toyota Auris vehicle, and to receive a contribution towards legal costs. The court declined to award excessive amounts for...

Citation
[2016] ZAFSHC 215
Parties
Applicant: M. W. U.; Respondent: B. D. U.
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
28 November 2016
Case Number
4739/2016
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Rule 43 Application for Interim Relief Pending Divorce
Outcome
Application granted in part; interim maintenance, medical aid retention, vehicle use, and legal cost contribution ordered.
Judges
C Reinders
Legal Topics
Maintenance Pendente Lite, Rule 43 Applications, Relocation Costs, Contribution to Legal Costs, Medical Aid Beneficiary
Family and Children Civil Procedure Maintenance Pendente Lite Rule 43 Applications Relocation Costs Contribution to Legal Costs Medical Aid Beneficiary

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

Parties

M. W. U.

Applicant

B. D. U.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Rule 43 Application for Interim Relief Pending Divorce

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to maintenance pendente lite under Rule 43.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a contribution towards relocation costs as part of interim maintenance.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant should be retained as a beneficiary on the respondent's medical aid scheme.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant is entitled to maintenance pendente lite, including provision for relocation costs, but not as a separate lump sum. Instead, the court ordered unequal monthly payments to accommodate the applicant's initial relocation needs, in line with the principle established in Zwiegelaar v Zwiegelaar (SCA). The respondent's financial disclosures were found to be incomplete, but the court was satisfied that he could afford the ordered payments. The applicant was also entitled to be retained on the respondent's medical aid scheme, to use the Toyota Auris vehicle, and to receive a contribution towards legal costs. The court declined to award excessive amounts for...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; interim maintenance, medical aid retention, vehicle use, and legal cost contribution ordered.

Orders

  • The respondent must pay maintenance to the applicant as follows: R30,000 before or on 10 December 2016; R30,000 before or on 3 January 2017; R15,000 before or on 3 February 2017 and thereafter before or on the 3rd of every subsequent month.
  • The respondent must retain the applicant as a beneficiary on his medical aid scheme and pay all reasonable medical costs not covered by the scheme.