South Africa Case Law

P.M v S (CA 43/22)

P.M v S (CA 43/22) [2025] ZANWHC 46; [2025] 2 All SA 514 (NWM) (5 March 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CA43/22

Judges

Reddy, Makoti

The appeal succeeded because the appellant was denied a fair trial. The Magistrate failed to allow the appellant to call crucial witnesses, including his eldest child, and improperly curtailed cross-examination. The Magistrate conflated the criminal trial with a maintenance enquiry, failed to consider relevant documentary evidence of payments, and did not properly investigate the appellant's means or intent. These procedural irregularities vitiated the proceedings, rendering the conviction and sentence unsustainable. The best interests of the children and the appellant's constitutional rights…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Act
• Fair Trial Rights
• Mens Rea
• Best Interests Of Child

S v Nchabeleng (Rev 47/2024)

S v Nchabeleng (Rev 47/2024) [2024] ZALMPPHC 54 (28 May 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

Rev 47/2024

Judges

Kganyago, Pillay

The High Court set aside a maintenance conviction and sentence after finding unfair plea, sentencing, and review irregularities in the magistrate’s court.

• Maintenance Act
• Fair Trial Rights
• Defective Charge Sheet
• Mitigation And Aggravation
• Automatic Review
• Plea Procedure

L.C.W and Others v Road Accident Fund (2019/15424)

L.C.W and Others v Road Accident Fund (2019/15424) [2024] ZAGPJHC 348 (9 April 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2019/15424

Judge

Siwendu

High Court damages judgment on loss of support against the RAF, fixing the deceased’s probable income at R85,000 per month and applying contingency deductions.

• Loss Of Support
• Quantification Of Damages
• Contingency Deductions
• Maintenance Act
• Duty Of Support
• Remarriage Contingency

J.F.L v T.G.L (A3080/2020)

J.F.L v T.G.L (A3080/2020) [2023] ZAGPJHC 90 (6 February 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A3080/2020

Judges

Mudau, Dippenaar

The High Court dismissed an appeal against refusal to discharge or reduce spousal maintenance, finding no proper condonation and no proof of inability to pay.

• Spousal Maintenance
• Variation Of Maintenance Order
• Condonation
• Settlement Agreement
• Maintenance Act
• Prospects Of Success

S v Mashaba (R29/2022)

S v Mashaba (R29/2022) [2022] ZAMPMBHC 88 (8 December 2022)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

R29/2022

Judges

TV Ratshibvumo, D Greyling-Coetzer

The proceedings in the magistrate's court were fundamentally irregular. The accused was convicted and sentenced without a formal charge being put to him and without being afforded the opportunity to plead, violating both constitutional rights and statutory requirements under the Criminal Procedure Act. The conversion of the proceedings into a maintenance enquiry did not cure these defects, and the subsequent imposition of a sentence was unlawful. The separation of prosecutorial and judicial functions was not maintained, and the accused's rights to a fair trial were disregarded. The conviction…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Act
• Fair Trial Rights
• Procedural Irregularity
• Conversion Of Proceedings

S v Mndela (217700)

S v Mndela (217700) [2022] ZAECMHC 32; 2023 (1) SACR 275 (ECM) (8 September 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

217700

Judges

M.S. Jolwana, R.W.N. Brooks

The High Court held that the magistrate was correct in dismissing the State's application to put into operation the suspended sentence, as the application was premature. The proper procedure requires that such an application be brought only after the accused has been convicted in the subsequent matter and after the relevant appeal or review periods have expired. The operationalisation of a suspended sentence must be conducted with due care to avoid prejudice to the accused, and only after all procedural safeguards have been observed. The prosecutor is entitled to bring the application, but on…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Act
• Suspended Sentence
• Review Proceedings
• Gross Irregularity
• Criminal Procedure

VDB v VDB and Others (22/11181)

VDB v VDB and Others (22/11181) [2022] ZAGPJHC 271; 2022 (5) SA 633 (GJ) (20 April 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

22/11181

Judge

T Siwendu

The court found that the Maintenance Act governs the procedure for execution of maintenance orders and does not provide for a right to prior notice before a warrant of execution is issued. The applicant's reliance on Butchart v Butchart and Block v Block was misplaced, as those cases dealt with writs issued under Rule 45 of the Uniform Rules, not the Maintenance Act. The only remedy available to the applicant under the Maintenance Act is to approach the Maintenance Court to set aside the warrant if he has complied with the order. The court held that the applicant failed to establish a prima f…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Enforcement
• Writ Of Execution
• Maintenance Act
• Urgent Interdict
• Notice Requirements

S v Ndlangamandla (R23/2021; A698/2020)

S v Ndlangamandla (R23/2021; A698/2020) [2021] ZAMPMBHC 60; 2022 (1) SACR 546 (MM) (2 December 2021)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

R23/2021; A698/2020

Judges

T.V. Ratshibvumo, D. Greyling-Coetzer

The High Court found that the proceedings in the magistrate's court were not in accordance with justice due to the absence of a complete and properly interpreted trial record. The magistrate acknowledged that portions of the record were missing and could not be reconstructed or retrieved. The lack of a full record prevented the High Court from conducting a meaningful review, and the accused's rights to a fair trial and review were compromised. The court emphasized the duty of judicial officers to ensure that records are complete and properly translated into English, as required for review pro…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Act
• Incomplete Record
• Review Proceedings
• Interpretation Of Proceedings

AP v S (A33/2019)

AP v S (A33/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 757 (12 August 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A33/2019

Judges

E Molahlehi, L Windell

The appeal court found that the trial court did not err in imposing a custodial sentence for wilful failure to pay maintenance. The appellant's claim of inability to pay was rejected on the facts, and there was no basis for converting the criminal trial into a maintenance inquiry under section 41 of the Maintenance Act. The trial court properly considered the seriousness of the offence, the impact on the complainant and children, and the appellant's lack of remorse. The sentence imposed was not shockingly inappropriate or vitiated by misdirection. The appeal court held that the sentence was f…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Act
• Failure To Pay Maintenance
• Sentencing Principles
• Wilful Noncompliance
• Spousal And Child Support

FS v ES (A3038/2020)

FS v ES (A3038/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 487 (18 June 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A3038/2020

Judges

Maier-Frawley, Fisher

The High Court increased a child maintenance award from R6,000 to R12,000 per month, holding that the maintenance court misdirected itself on the father’s means.

• Child Maintenance
• Apportionment Of Liability
• Best Interests Of Child
• Maintenance Act
• Appeal Discretion
• Quantification Of Expenses