South Africa Case Law

U v U (4739/2016)

U v U (4739/2016) [2016] ZAFSHC 215 (28 November 2016)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4739/2016

Judge

C Reinders

The court found that the applicant is entitled to maintenance pendente lite, including provision for relocation costs, but not as a separate lump sum. Instead, the court ordered unequal monthly payments to accommodate the applicant's initial relocation needs, in line with the principle established in Zwiegelaar v Zwiegelaar (SCA). The respondent's financial disclosures were found to be incomplete, but the court was satisfied that he could afford the ordered payments. The applicant was also entitled to be retained on the respondent's medical aid scheme, to use the Toyota Auris vehicle, and to…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Rule 43 Applications
• Relocation Costs
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Medical Aid Beneficiary

M.M.W v H.J.W (32130/2014)

M.M.W v H.J.W (32130/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 765 (8 October 2014)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

32130/2014

Judge

E M Kubushi

The court granted interim Rule 43 relief pending divorce, dismissing a prolixity objection and reducing the amounts claimed for relocation and legal costs.

• Rule 43 Interim Relief
• Spousal Maintenance
• Relocation Costs
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Rule-43
• Interim-maintenance

Simpson v Ntsele and Another (LCC38/03)

Simpson v Ntsele and Another (LCC38/03) [2007] ZALCC 21 (11 October 2007)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC38/03

Judge

Gildenhuys

The Land Claims Court made an order recording a settlement for the First Respondent to vacate the farm, with relocation support and alternative land assistance.

• Eviction
• Labour Tenant Rights
• Land Reform Program
• Relocation Costs
• Labour-tenant-rights
• Land-reform-program