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
S.R. v S.T.M. (2022/048303) [2025] ZAGPJHC 691 (15 July 2025)
The High Court ordered the respondent to file a financial disclosure form in a Rule 43 dispute, rejecting privacy objections and holding that disclosure remained required despite a disputed marriage.
MEC for Social Development v Zimisele (PA 14/24) [2025] ZALAC 39 (26 June 2025)
The first respondent was a director of three companies and failed to disclose his financial interests as required by the Senior Management Service Handbook and Public Service Regulations. The Labour Court erred in finding that no disclosure was required and that the relevant legislation was irrelevant. The duty to disclose is both a statutory and fiduciary obligation for senior management employees. The Department was entitled to disqualify the first respondent for non-disclosure, as this omission was material to his suitability for appointment. The Labour Court's review and setting aside of…
Source excerpt
N.S.F v R.H.F (2024/060778) [2025] ZAGPJHC 534 (2 June 2025)
Rule 43 application partly granted. The court ordered interim spousal maintenance, continued listed monthly payments, and a R60,000 contribution to legal costs.
J.V.W v P.C.V.W (EL514/2025) [2025] ZAECELLC 9 (27 May 2025)
Rule 43 application for a further contribution toward divorce litigation costs dismissed for lack of full financial disclosure and proof of changed circumstances.
M.S.M (born M[...]) v A.R.M (2021/36970) [2025] ZAGPPHC 457 (30 April 2025)
The court found that the applicant had demonstrated a material change in her financial circumstances since the initial Rule 43 order. The maintenance awarded previously was insufficient to meet her living and medical needs, and the respondent had failed to provide suitable accommodation and pay medical expense shortfalls. The respondent's opposition was based on bare denials and unsupported assertions, and he failed to provide full financial disclosure. The applicant's need for increased maintenance, suitable accommodation, arrear medical expenses, and a further contribution to legal costs wa…
Source excerpt
N.P.M v W.R (094519/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 185 (20 February 2025)
The court refused a postponement in a Rule 43 matter and ordered interim maintenance, a vehicle, and a costs contribution after finding the request was not bona fide.
T.M.C v K.M.P (038855/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 23 (6 January 2025)
The High Court granted Rule 43 interim maintenance for the applicant and minor child, rejected technical objections, and ordered child-related support pending divorce.
H.X v G.X (017721/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 11 (3 January 2025)
A Rule 43 interim maintenance application was dismissed after the court found the applicant had failed to make full and frank financial disclosure.
Q.N.M v M.M.M (2022/013249) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1317 (12 December 2024)
Rule 43 interim maintenance relief was stayed because both parties failed to comply with a mediation directive and the financial papers were inadequate.
S.T.H v A.T.H (060610/22) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1237 (28 November 2024)
The court found that the plaintiff failed to discharge the onus of proving a need for lifelong spousal maintenance. Both parties possess existing and prospective means to support themselves following the breakdown of the marriage. The plaintiff is economically independent, has multiple sources of income, and her financial difficulties stem from her own irresponsibility rather than any inability to earn. She did not provide full disclosure of her earnings, undermining her claim. The defendant's business is struggling, and his health issues impose significant financial obligations. The plaintif…
Source excerpt
Explore more
