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
Kivetts v Brugmans (04853/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 721 (21 May 2021)
Rule 43 interim divorce relief was granted for maintenance, medical aid and vehicle expenses, but unrelated debts and broader litigation costs were refused.
L v L (2017/6235) [2018] ZAGPJHC 101 (29 March 2018)
The court found that the Rule 43 order could not co-exist with the full court judgment ordering the return of the children to Norway, where maintenance and legal costs were provided for. The respondent's failure to disclose her employment status and subsequent fraudulent misrepresentation constituted improper and unlawful conduct. The applicant's non-compliance with the Rule 43 order was not condoned, but the respondent's prejudicial conduct justified partial relief for the applicant. The Rule 43 order was discharged in respect of the respondent's maintenance from 21 August 2015 and in respec…
Source excerpt
P v R (6395/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 436 (31 July 2017)
Rule 43 divorce interim relief: the court awarded child maintenance and expenses, but refused a costs contribution and retrospective maintenance.
Van Wijk v Van Wijk [2011] ZAWCHC 295; ; 14434/2009 (17 June 2011)
The High Court dismissed an application to amend a pendente lite maintenance order, finding the applicant’s evidence of reduced income too vague and unconvincing.
A.W (Born G) v R.A.W (469/10) [2010] ZAECELLC 1 (7 September 2010)
The court found that the applicant was entitled to pendente lite maintenance for herself and the minor child, but not for her daughter from a previous relationship, as her biological father was providing support and the parties were married out of community of property. The applicant's claimed expenses were scrutinized and adjusted to reasonable amounts based on the parties' modest means and the respondent's financial capacity, including his equity in property. The applicant was also entitled to a contribution towards legal costs, but the amount claimed was excessive and reduced to a reasonab…
Source excerpt
J V V v J V V (58485/2008) [2009] ZAGPPHC 82 (29 May 2009)
Rule 43 application partly granted: the respondent was ordered to pay pendente lite maintenance, medical costs, and a contribution to costs.
Explore more
