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
H.E.D. v D.D (2022/14582) [2025] ZAGPJHC 465 (13 May 2025)
Rule 43 application dismissed where the court found the respondent unemployed and unable to pay interim maintenance, medical aid premiums, or legal cost contributions.
Savvas v Savvas N.O and Others (1969/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 115 (7 April 2025)
The court found that the applicant failed to establish a proper case for interim maintenance from the deceased estate. Her evidence regarding financial need and quantification of expenses was inconsistent and unsubstantiated. The applicant's bank statements and investment balances indicated she had sufficient means to meet her reasonable maintenance needs. The executor's evidence of a cash shortfall in the estate was not contradicted. Procedural objections raised by the executor, such as premature claim lodgement and non-joinder, were dismissed, but on the merits, the applicant did not discha…
Source excerpt
L.K v B.R.K (2024-116399) [2025] ZAGPPHC 360 (4 April 2025)
Rule 43 interim maintenance and costs relief was refused. The court found the maintenance claims unreasonable on the evidence and dismissed the application.
M.C v H.J.C (051384/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 291 (13 March 2025)
Rule 43 interim maintenance ruling in a divorce matter. The High Court ordered maintenance, accommodation-related relief, contact arrangements, and legal cost contribution.
C.A.S. v K.V.S. (2024/143234) [2025] ZAGPJHC 718 (28 February 2025)
Rule 43 interim relief granted in part: the court ordered maintenance, school-fee reimbursement and legal-cost contributions for the minor children.
C.R.E v M.E (2023/131897) [2025] ZAGPJHC 716 (27 February 2025)
The applicant failed to demonstrate a patent error or omission attributable to the court in the granting of the Rule 43 interim maintenance order. The forensic audit and financial evidence presented were available during the original proceedings and do not constitute grounds for variation under Rule 42(1)(b). The applicant did not establish a material change in circumstances as required by Rule 43(6), nor did he prove fraud or deliberate suppression of evidence by the respondent. The order reflects the court's true intention based on the evidence before it, and the principle of finality precl…
Source excerpt
M.O v R.O (15617/2022) [2025] ZAWCHC 37 (27 January 2025)
The court dismissed a contempt application over Rule 43 non-compliance, found a material change in circumstances, and varied interim maintenance obligations.
C.L.K v K.K.K (22/010214) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1287 (17 December 2024)
Rule 43 counter-application granted in part: interim maintenance, specified children’s expenses, cell phone reimbursement, and R800,000 costs contribution were ordered; arrear maintenance was refused.
L[...] D[...] K[...] v L[...] D[...] K[...] (2022/21021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1051 (14 October 2024)
Rule 43 interim relief dispute over children’s residence, contact, maintenance, and a parenting coordinator was decided in the mother’s favour.
Z.D.P v Z.M (44209/19) [2024] ZAGPJHC 896 (16 September 2024)
The court found that the parties' acrimonious relationship and lack of compromise were detrimental to the best interests of the minor children. The removal of H[...] from formal schooling for religious reasons was not in line with her intellectual and social rights, but since the parties agreed to home schooling, the court endorsed this arrangement. The applicant retained the financial means to provide maintenance, and interim maintenance was necessary. The court rejected both parties' claims for contributions towards legal costs under Rule 43, holding that punitive costs are not contemplated…
Source excerpt
Explore more
