South Africa Case Law

Liebman v Liebman In re: Liebman v Liebman (24227/2021)

Liebman v Liebman In re: Liebman v Liebman (24227/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 957 (5 December 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

24227/2021

Judge

E van der Schyff

The court found that the respondent, despite protestations of continued domicile in South Africa, had relocated to the United States for medical reasons and to be with family, shipped his assets abroad, and maintained only minimal ties to South Africa. The respondent’s intention to return was not substantiated by facts, and his physical absence was prolonged. The court held that the respondent is a peregrinus, lacking sufficient assets in South Africa to satisfy a potential costs order. Accordingly, the respondent was ordered to furnish security for costs in the sequestration application, wit…

Source excerpt

• Security For Costs
• Peregrinus Status
• Domicile Of Choice
• Sequestration Application

O.B v L.B.D.S (20540/2018)

O.B v L.B.D.S (20540/2018) [2021] ZAWCHC 43; [2021] 2 All SA 527 (WCC); 2021 (6) SA 215 (WCC) (9 March 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

20540/2018

Judges

Saldanha, Henney, Cloete

The majority held that the appellant established, on a balance of probabilities, that she was domiciled within the Western Cape High Court's jurisdiction at the time the divorce summons was issued. The court interpreted section 1(2) of the Divorce Act to mean that the relevant date for jurisdiction is the date of issue, not service. The appellant's evidence showed she intended to settle in Caledon indefinitely, had made arrangements to live and work there, and only decided to return to Russia after the summons was issued. The court adopted a flexible approach to the domicile requirement, cons…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Jurisdiction
• Domicile Of Choice
• Civil Union Act
• Deeming Provision
• Forum Shopping

T.M.S.M v P.T.M (35304/2015)

T.M.S.M v P.T.M (35304/2015) [2018] ZAGPPHC 538 (25 January 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

35304/2015

Judge

Tlhapi

The court held the plaintiff had not proved domicile of choice in Pretoria when divorce proceedings were instituted, so jurisdiction was lacking and the action was dismissed.

• Divorce Jurisdiction
• Domicile Of Choice
• Divorce Act Section 2
• Domicile Act Section 6a
• Divorce-jurisdiction
• Domicile-of-choice

V v V (5881/17)

V v V (5881/17) [2017] ZAGPPHC 324 (6 July 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

5881/17

Judge

P M Mabuse

The court found that both parties are South African citizens with their domicile of origin in South Africa. The respondent failed to prove that either party had abandoned their South African domicile and acquired a domicile of choice in Dubai. The evidence showed that their residence in Dubai was for work purposes and contingent on employment, without permanent residency or intention to settle there indefinitely. The court held that mere residence abroad does not equate to a change of domicile, and the respondent did not discharge the burden of proving such a change. Accordingly, the South Af…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Jurisdiction
• Domicile Of Choice
• Interdict
• Divorce Act
• Domicile Act

D.B v M.B (10019/2014)

D.B v M.B (10019/2014) [2014] ZAWCHC 178 (2 December 2014)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

10019/2014

Judge

J Cloete

The court found, on a balance of probabilities and applying the Plascon-Evans rule, that the respondent intended to remain in South Africa for an indefinite period at the time of marriage. The respondent's acquisition of property, establishment of a permanent home, intention to raise children in South Africa, and conduct evidenced a settled intention to reside indefinitely. The respondent's explanations for his ties to Germany and lack of understanding of documents were unconvincing. The court held that the respondent was domiciled in South Africa at the date of marriage, and thus the marriag…

Source excerpt

• Matrimonial Property Regime
• Domicile Of Choice
• Community Of Property
• Divorce Proceedings

Hillard v Hillard (1464/2007)

Hillard v Hillard (1464/2007) [2008] ZAFSHC 135 (4 December 2008)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1464/2007

Judge

Cillié

The court found that the defendant did not abandon his South African domicile for a new domicile in Lesotho. His continued ownership and investment in property in South Africa, maintenance of bank accounts, and regular return to his Ladybrand residence demonstrated a lack of intention to settle indefinitely in Lesotho. The defendant's conduct and way of life indicated that his primary and permanent home remained in South Africa. Consequently, at the time of the marriage, the defendant was domiciled in South Africa, and South African matrimonial property law, including the accrual system, appl…

Source excerpt

• Matrimonial Property Regime
• Domicile Of Choice
• Accrual System
• Ante Nuptial Contract