Van de Pol v Van De Pol (2057/2008) [2008] ZAFSHC 43; 2009 (5) SA 223 (O) (29 May 2008)

Van de Pol v Van De Pol (2057/2008) [2008] ZAFSHC 43; 2009 (5) SA 223 (O) (29 May 2008)

The court found that the applicant was cohabiting with another man who was supporting her, as evidenced by the respondent's affidavit and the social worker's report, which the applicant did not challenge or refute. On the papers before the court, there was no basis to gainsay the respondent's version. Applying the principle from Carstens v Carstens, the court held it is contrary to public policy and equity for the applicant to claim maintenance from her husband while being supported by another man. The court also refused a contribution towards costs, distinguishing Carstens on the basis that the parties in this case were married out of community of property and the applicant made no claim...

Citation
[2008] ZAFSHC 43
Parties
Applicant: Susara Johanna Van De Pol; Respondent: Hendrik Van De Pol
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 May 2008
Case Number
2057/2008
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Rule 43 Application for Maintenance Pendent Lite
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
H.M. Musi
Legal Topics
Maintenance Pendente Lite, Cohabitation, Contribution to Costs, Divorce Proceedings
Family and Children Maintenance Pendente Lite Cohabitation Contribution to Costs Divorce Proceedings

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

Parties

Susara Johanna Van De Pol

Applicant

Hendrik Van De Pol

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Rule 43 Application for Maintenance Pendent Lite

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to maintenance pendent lite from her husband while allegedly cohabiting with another man.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to a contribution towards costs in the divorce action.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant was cohabiting with another man who was supporting her, as evidenced by the respondent's affidavit and the social worker's report, which the applicant did not challenge or refute. On the papers before the court, there was no basis to gainsay the respondent's version. Applying the principle from Carstens v Carstens, the court held it is contrary to public policy and equity for the applicant to claim maintenance from her husband while being supported by another man. The court also refused a contribution towards costs, distinguishing Carstens on the basis that the parties in this case were married out of community of property and the applicant made no claim...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for maintenance pendent lite is dismissed.
  • The application for a contribution towards costs is dismissed.