South Africa Case Law

A.D.V.R v J.V.R (2021/47958)

A.D.V.R v J.V.R (2021/47958) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1305 (17 December 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/47958

Judge

Khan JL

The court found that the applicant's maintenance was insufficient to maintain her marital standard of living, especially given her health concerns and the respondent's continued financial capacity, as evidenced by substantial payments to third parties and multiple income streams. The respondent's claim of financial constraint was contradicted by bank statements showing significant income and discretionary payments. The court held that the reciprocal duty of support requires the respondent to prioritize the applicant's needs over those of third parties. The applicant's request for increased ma…

Source excerpt

• Rule 43 Interim Relief
• Spousal Maintenance
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Standard Of Living
• Reciprocal Duty Of Support

L.V.Z v A.V.Z (18151/24)

L.V.Z v A.V.Z (18151/24) [2024] ZAWCHC 365 (12 November 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

18151/24

Judge

Thulare

High Court rule 43 order granted maintenance pendente lite, rental and expenses, plus a R250,000 contribution to divorce costs.

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Rule 43 Application
• Standard Of Living
• Contribution To Costs
• Direct Payment Of Expenses
• Rule-43

M.M v T.M (2023/012335)

M.M v T.M (2023/012335) [2024] ZAGPJHC 835 (20 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/012335

Judge

Liebenberg

The High Court ordered pendente lite maintenance for a wife and child, plus legal-costs contributions, after finding both parties lacked full financial candour.

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Contribution Towards Legal Costs
• Trust Property Disclosure
• Standard Of Living
• Community Of Property
• Interim Relief

N.H.K v A.J.K (2022-053646)

N.H.K v A.J.K (2022-053646) [2024] ZAGPPHC 141 (20 February 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2022-053646

Judge

Nyathi

The court found that the applicant is financially destitute and wholly dependent on the respondent, who does not dispute his duty to maintain her but claims inability to pay the amounts sought. The evidence did not support the applicant's claim for relocation costs, but her entitlement to interim spousal maintenance and a contribution towards legal costs was established based on her personal circumstances, the history of the marriage, and the respondent's ongoing responsibility for household expenses. The court applied the principles from Taute v Taute, considering the parties' standard of li…

Source excerpt

• Interim Spousal Maintenance
• Rule 43 Application
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Medical Aid Cover
• Standard Of Living
• Financial Disclosure

B.D.S v G.M.D.S (38773/21)

B.D.S v G.M.D.S (38773/21) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1780 (4 October 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

38773/21

Judge

MNGQIBISA-THUSI

The court found that the applicant is unemployed, of advanced age, and has been accustomed to a high standard of living during the marriage. Although the respondent claims financial hardship, he remains a director of a company and receives monthly income. The applicant receives some rental income and has access to capital, but her monthly expenses are significant. The respondent's financial disclosure was considered, and the court balanced the needs and means of both parties. The court held that the applicant is entitled to interim maintenance, but at a reduced amount of R45,000 per month, re…

Source excerpt

• Interim Maintenance
• Rule 43 Applications
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Standard Of Living
• Condonation Of Late Filing

G.N.S v J.L (2023/004861)

G.N.S v J.L (2023/004861) [2023] ZAGPJHC 336 (12 April 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/004861

Judge

N. Mazibuko

Rule 43 divorce interim relief partly succeeded: the court granted maintenance, medical aid, vehicle and phone costs, and a R100,000 legal cost contribution.

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Rule 43 Procedure
• Standard Of Living
• Condonation Of Late Filing
• Rule-43

Y.B v L.B

Y.B v L.B [2023] ZAGPPHC 185; 5413/2020 (28 March 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

5413/2020

Judge

Nyathi

Rule 43 interim maintenance matter in which the court ordered the husband to pay monthly maintenance and contribute to the wife’s legal costs pending divorce.

• Interim Maintenance
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Rule 43 Procedure
• Standard Of Living
• Financial Disclosure
• Interim-maintenance

C.M.S.C v N.C (16742/2021)

C.M.S.C v N.C (16742/2021) [2021] ZAWCHC 227 (9 November 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16742/2021

Judge

Binns-Ward

The court granted interim maintenance in a divorce matter, fixing cash support at R13,000 per month plus specified expenses, and reserved costs for trial.

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Rule 43 Application
• Division Of Assets
• Standard Of Living
• Contribution To Costs
• Rule-43

A.S.L v H.R.L (20482/21)

A.S.L v H.R.L (20482/21) [2021] ZAGPPHC 695 (13 October 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

20482/21

Judge

Baqwa

The court found that the respondent earns a higher income than the applicant and, despite his continued responsibility for joint estate expenses, remains obliged to pay maintenance to the applicant pending the divorce. The relief sought by the applicant was deemed reasonable, temporary, and not intended for enrichment. The court balanced the need for maintenance and litigation equality, ordering maintenance and a contribution towards legal costs, while reinforcing the respondent's undertaking to maintain medical aid and insurance payments. The quantum of maintenance was reduced pro rata in li…

Source excerpt

• Interim Spousal Maintenance
• Contribution Towards Legal Costs
• Rule 43 Procedure
• Community Of Property
• Standard Of Living
• Duty Of Support

LP v MP (31812/2021)

LP v MP (31812/2021) [2021] ZAGPJHC 398 (20 September 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

31812/2021

Judge

S D J Wilson

The court found that the respondent's financial disclosures were selective and unreliable, and that his true income was understated. Analysis of bank statements revealed monthly credits and payments exceeding his declared income, indicating greater financial capacity. The applicant's maintenance claim was reasonable and moderate, reflecting the standard of living during the marriage. The respondent's failure to tender any maintenance initially was inconsistent with his legal obligations. The court concluded that the applicant was entitled to the full maintenance claimed and a contribution to…

Source excerpt

• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Rule 43 Proceedings
• Assessment Of Means
• Standard Of Living
• Divorce Action