South Africa Case Law

S.A.V v H.J.V (A107/2018)

S.A.V v H.J.V (A107/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 432 (19 August 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A107/2018

Judges

NJ Kollapen, C Lamount, TAN Makhubele

The appeal court found that the trial court erred by valuing the contributions of the applicant and respondent equally without distinguishing between their respective roles and by failing to account for the respondent's own assets in the redistribution. While the respondent's contributions as homemaker and supporter were significant, they could not be equated with those of the breadwinner, though the margin should not be large. The appeal court exercised its discretion to order a redistribution of 40% of the applicant's assets to the respondent, rather than 50%, and set aside the trial court'…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Act Section 7 Redistribution
• Ante Nuptial Contract
• Contribution To Estate
• Division Of Assets
• Discretion Of Court
• Costs Award

M.M (born S) v P.M.M (DIV155/2017)

M.M (born S) v P.M.M (DIV155/2017) [2018] ZANWHC 89 (22 November 2018)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

DIV155/2017

Judge

Matlapeng

The High Court granted a divorce, ordered equal division of the joint estate, and refused the husband’s claim for forfeiture of benefits in a contested marriage.

• Divorce Act Forfeiture
• Division Of Joint Estate
• Irretrievable Breakdown
• Pension Interest
• Contribution To Estate
• Divorce-act-forfeiture

Masukela M v Masukela P (DIV155/2017)

Masukela M v Masukela P (DIV155/2017) [2018] ZANWHC 65 (22 November 2018)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

DIV155/2017

Judge

D I Matlapeng

Divorce matter in which the court refused forfeiture of patrimonial benefits, ordered equal division of the joint estate, and granted divorce with no costs.

• Divorce Act Forfeiture
• Division Of Joint Estate
• Pension Interest
• Irretrievable Breakdown
• Contribution To Estate
• Divorce-act-forfeiture

Bormann v Bormann (13601/2011)

Bormann v Bormann (13601/2011) [2012] ZAWCHC 101 (2 February 2012)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

13601/2011

Judge

Saldanha

A divorce court granted the husband a redistribution order under section 7(3) of the Divorce Act, awarding him 50% of the net proceeds of the wife’s immovable property.

• Divorce Act Section 7 3
• Redistribution Order
• Contribution To Estate
• Division Of Assets
• Donation Of Property
• Divorce-act-section-7-3

D.J.K v D.C.J.K (57991/2007)

D.J.K v D.C.J.K (57991/2007) [2010] ZAGPPHC 621 (10 March 2010)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

57991/2007

Judge

Phatudi

Divorce action concerning redistribution under section 7 of the Divorce Act and maintenance. The court ordered sale of the marital home and awarded the defendant 30% of net proceeds.

• Redistribution Order
• Maintenance Claim
• Division Of Assets
• Contribution To Estate
• Divorce-redistribution-order
• Maintenance-claim

Kirkland v Kirkland (A434/04)

Kirkland v Kirkland (A434/04) [2005] ZAWCHC 42; [2005] 3 All SA 353 (C); 2006 (6) SA 144 (C) (10 June 2005)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A434/04

Judges

Blignault, Veldhuizen, Dlodlo

The appellate court found that the trial judge erred in valuing certain assets, notably appellant's deposit with Barlows, which should have been reduced to reflect the actual loss. The court also held that the values of assets in England should have been adjusted for exchange rate fluctuations between the date of the settlement agreement and the date of judgment. While the parties had agreed on asset values, the court determined that material unforeseen deviations, such as realised sale values and currency changes, were relevant factors under section 7(5)(d) of the Divorce Act. The court decl…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Act Section 7 3
• Redistribution Of Assets
• Matrimonial Property
• Contribution To Estate
• Costs Award
• Admission Of New Evidence

Kritzinger v Kritzinger (52/87)

Kritzinger v Kritzinger (52/87) [1988] ZASCA 91; [1989] 1 All SA 325 (A) (16 September 1988)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

52/87

Judges

Corbett, Milne, Nicholas

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant made substantial, direct financial contributions to the acquisition and improvement of the common home, far exceeding those of the respondent. The respondent's alleged career sacrifice did not constitute a contribution within the meaning of section 7(4) of the Divorce Act, as it was not a positive act that caused an increase in the appellant's estate. The Court found no conspicuous disparity in fault between the parties and held that fault should not be a significant factor in the proprietary claims. The trial court erred by adopting a globu…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Act Section 7
• Redistribution Order
• Contribution To Estate
• Fault In Divorce
• Division Of Assets

Beaumont v Beaumont (326/1985)

Beaumont v Beaumont (326/1985) [1986] ZASCA 158; [1987] 2 All SA 1 (A) (15 December 1986)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

326/1985

Judges

Trengove JA, Viljoen JA, Botha JA, Jacobs JA, Boshoff AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in awarding both a redistribution order and maintenance to the respondent. The respondent's contributions to the appellant's estate, both direct and indirect, were substantial and extended beyond the ordinary duty of support, justifying a redistribution order under section 7(3) of the Divorce Act. The maintenance awarded was necessary to meet the respondent's reasonable needs, given her limited earning capacity and responsibilities to minor children. The appellant's financial position was found to be under…

Source excerpt

• Redistribution Order
• Maintenance Post Divorce
• Divorce Act Section 7
• Antenuptial Contract
• Contribution To Estate
• Judicial Discretion