Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
J.M.M v P.M.M and Another [2023] ZAGPPHC 422; 60586/2011 (26 May 2023)
The court dismissed a late application to vary a divorce order to add a pension-interest order under section 7(8) of the Divorce Act.
H.J.K v Swartz and Others (2015/08456) [2023] ZAGPJHC 313; [2023] 2 All SA 764 (GJ); 2023 (6) SA 500 (GJ) (11 April 2023)
The court found that the receiver/liquidator, Mr Swartz, lacked both the power and locus standi to liquidate or withdraw pension fund assets on behalf of the joint estate or the applicant, as such powers were not expressly granted in the divorce order nor by statute. The machinery for payment from pension funds under section 7(8) of the Divorce Act was not invoked, and the applicant's demand for cash payment from the pension fund was contrary to the agreed liquidation and distribution account. The order requiring Mr Swartz to realise assets was impossible to comply with, as no realisable asse…
Source excerpt
C.N.N v N.N (2021/11607) [2023] ZAGPJHC 208; [2023] 2 All SA 365 (GJ); 2023 (5) SA 199 (GJ) (23 February 2023)
The court held that the applicant cannot claim pension benefits that accrued to the respondent before the divorce was granted. Section 7(8) of the Divorce Act only allows for the division of pension interests that exist at the date of divorce, not accrued pension benefits resulting from resignation prior to divorce. The legislative framework does not permit a non-member spouse to claim directly from the fund where the member spouse has exited the fund before divorce. The variation sought by the applicant, substituting 'pension interest' with 'accrued pension benefit', would be unenforceable a…
Source excerpt
Minister of Communications v Ngewu and Others (CCT 117/11) [2013] ZACC 44; 2014 (3) BCLR 364 (CC) (5 December 2013)
The Constitutional Court held that it retained competence to extend the period of suspension of the declaration of invalidity, as the period had not yet expired at the time of hearing. However, the applicant failed to provide a cogent and sufficient explanation for the delay in finalizing the legislative amendment. The Court found that the prejudice to Ms Ngewu, who continued to suffer destitution, outweighed any minor administrative inconvenience to the state. The differences between the reading-in remedy and the proposed Bill were insignificant, and the applicant's assertion that the parlia…
Source excerpt
Explore more
