Ante nuptial contract, ANC, post nuptial contract, divorce, change property regime, Cape Town

Ante nuptial contract, ANC, post nuptial contract, divorce, change property regime, Cape Town

Related Post

I am a victim of Domestic Violence – Please provide me with questions and answers for general issues in domestic violence matters.

  • What is considered domestic violence in South Africa?
    • Domestic violence in South Africa includes physical, emotional, sexual, or economic abuse within an intimate relationship or household.
  • Are men also protected under South African domestic violence laws?
    • Yes, South African laws protect both men and women from domestic violence. Any person, regardless of gender, can be a victim or perpetrator.
  • How can one obtain a protection order against domestic violence in South Africa?
    • To obtain a protection order, a victim can apply at the Magistrate’s Court, and if in immediate danger, they can approach the police.
  • What are the consequences of violating a protection order in South Africa?
    • Violating a protection order is a criminal offence, and penalties may include fines or imprisonment.
  • Can domestic violence victims get legal assistance in South Africa?
    • Yes, victims can seek legal assistance through organizations like Legal Aid South Africa or private attorneys specializing in domestic violence cases.
  • Are there support services available for domestic violence victims in South Africa?
    • Yes, various organizations provide support services, including shelters, counseling, and legal advice for domestic violence victims.
  • What role can the police play in domestic violence cases in South Africa?
    • The police can intervene, arrest the perpetrator if necessary, and assist and/or advise victims in obtaining protection orders.
  • Is it possible to report domestic violence anonymously in South Africa?
    • While anonymous reporting might be challenging, victims can request confidentiality, and their information can be protected during legal proceedings.
  • What rights do children have in cases of domestic violence in South Africa?
    • Children have the right to be protected from domestic violence, and authorities may intervene to ensure their safety.
  • Can a victim drop charges against an alleged perpetrator of domestic violence in South Africa?
    • In criminal cases, only the state can drop charges. However, in civil cases like obtaining a protection order, the victim has control over the process.
  • Are there cultural considerations in addressing domestic violence in South Africa?
    • Yes, cultural sensitivities are considered, but domestic violence is universally condemned, and legal measures apply regardless of cultural background.
  • What is the role of social workers in domestic violence cases in South Africa?
    • Social workers can provide counseling, support, and assistance in finding resources for victims of domestic violence.
  • Can a victim of domestic violence in South Africa claim compensation?
    • Yes, victims may seek compensation through civil claims against the perpetrator for damages suffered due to domestic violence.
  • Are employers obligated to support employees experiencing domestic violence in South Africa?
    • Employers are encouraged to support employees facing domestic violence and can provide assistance such as counseling or time off for legal proceedings.
  • Can technology be used as evidence in domestic violence cases in South Africa?
    • Yes, text messages, emails, or other electronic communications can be used as evidence in domestic violence cases.
  • What steps can schools take to address domestic violence affecting students in South Africa?
    • Schools can create awareness, provide counseling services, and collaborate with relevant authorities to address domestic violence affecting students.
  • How does the South African legal system handle false accusations of domestic violence?
    • False accusations can be taken seriously, and the legal system aims to discern the truth through investigations to prevent misuse of protection orders.
  • Is domestic violence education mandatory in South African schools?
    • While not mandatory, initiatives exist to incorporate awareness programs about domestic violence into school curricula.
  • Can immigration status affect a victim’s ability to report domestic violence in South Africa?
    • No, immigration status should not be a barrier to reporting domestic violence, and victims are encouraged to seek help regardless of their legal status.
  • What community resources are available to combat domestic violence in South Africa?
    • Community resources include NGOs, helplines, and community centers that provide support, counseling, and education on domestic violence.

Claiming Child Maintenance from Grandparents – What does the law say?

Many people are of the view that child maintenance may only be claimed by the parents of a child. They have that view even in the case where the parents cannot afford to maintain the child, but the grandparents can. At the outset, we state that the latter view is incorrect. If parents cannot afford to maintain a child, a claim for maintenance may be made against both the paternal and maternal grandparents of the child involved. This applies whether or not the child was born in or out of wedlock. Prior to 2004, or before the case of Petersen v Maintenance Officer, Simon’s Town Maintenance Court, and Others 2004 (2) SA 56 (C), the law allowed parents to claim maintenance for their minor children from maternal and paternal grandparents, as long as the child was born within wedlock, or out of a marriage. If the child was born out of wedlock, then in such a case, the parent could only claim from the maternal grandparents. And not the paternal grandparents. This was clearly unfair and unconstitutional and something that many people would have issues with. In 2004, Adv. Muhammad Abduroaf had a client who wanted to claim maintenance from the maternal grandparents of her minor child, but the law did not allow for it. He and his client was not happy with the legal position and took the matter to the Western Cape High Court (the Provisional Division of the Cape). Adv. Abduroaf cited the Maintenance Office of Simon’s Town Maintenance Court and the paternal grandparents. The matter was argued, and the Court found in favour of Adv. Muhammad Abduroaf and his client. The case opened many doors for mothers in similar positions. Below we discuss the case. Due to Adv. Muhammad Abduroaf’s academic background in Constitutional law and willingness to fight for his client, he challenged the legal position.

Petersen v Maintenance Officer, Simon’s Town Maintenance Court, and Others

2004 (2) SA 56 (C)

The well-known case of Petersen v Maintenance Officer, Simon’s Town Maintenance Court, and Others 2004 (2) SA 56 (C) was a special one. Not because Adv. Abduroaf and his client were successful, but the effect of the case meant that children who could never claim maintenance from paternal grandparents if they were born out of wedlock could do so due to the case. The case also brought about widespread attention to the fact that a parent can claim maintenance from grandparents when the parents cannot afford to support the child on their own.

The following is extracted from the case of Petersen v Maintenance Officer, Simon’s Town Maintenance Court, and Others 2004 (2) SA 56 (C) :

[6] The Motan decision is generally accepted as authority for the assertion that the paternal grandparents of an extramarital child do not owe a duty of support to the child. The interpretation of the common law in Motan and the resultant denial of a duty of support by the paternal grandparents of an E extra-marital child has, even prior to the present constitutional dispensation, been widely criticised by South African writers. Van den Heever Breach of Promise and Seduction in South African Law (1954) at 70 says the following: ‘It is submitted that the decision is so patently wrong that it should be reconsidered; for it is based on legislative considerations and methods, which are, moreover, unsound. It is contrary to public policy and humanity and should, if necessary, be rectified by the Legislature.’

This is what Adv. Abduroaf argued:

[7] Mr Abduroaf, who appears for the applicant, submitted that the common-law rule as interpreted in Motan, violates the extra-marital child’s constitutional rights to equality and dignity enshrined in ss 9 and 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996 (the Constitution) and is contrary to the best interest of the child (see s 28(2) of the Constitution). He accordingly submits that the common-law rule is unreasonable and unjustifiable and should be declared unconstitutional and invalid.

Adv. Abduroaf further submitted:

[14] Mr Abduroaf submitted that the constitutional values embodied in ss 9, 10 and 28(2) of the Constitution, dictate that the common-law rule as enunciated in Motan, be developed by imposing a duty of support upon the paternal grandparents of an extra-marital child in the event of the natural parents of such child being unable to support the child. The said sections of the Constitution provide: ‘9 (1) Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law. (2) Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms. To promote the achievement of equality, legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons, or categories of persons, disadvantaged by unfair discrimination may be taken. (3) The State may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. (4) No person may unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds in terms of ss (3). National legislation must be enacted to prevent or prohibit unfair discrimination. (5) Discrimination on one or more of the grounds listed in ss (3) is unfair unless it is established that the discrimination is fair. 10 Everyone has inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity respected and protected.   . . . 28 (2) A child’s best interest is of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child.’  

The Ruling in Petersen v Maintenance Officer, Simon’s Town Maintenance Court, and Others 2004 (2) SA 56 (C)

At the end of the matter, the Court made the following ruling: [29] In the result I make the following order:
  1. It is declared that the second and third respondents have a legal duty to support the extra-marital child of the applicant, J, born on 7 January 2003, to the same extent to which the fourth and fifth respondents are liable to maintain the said child.
  2. The first respondent is directed to take the necessary steps for an enquiry to be held in terms of s 10 of the Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, with a view to enquiring into the provision of maintenance by the second and third respondents for the said extra-marital child of the applicant.
  3. No order as to costs is made.
Petersen v Maintenance Officer, Simon’s Town Maintenance Court, and Others 2004 (2) SA 56 (C) [caption id="attachment_10745" align="alignnone" width="300"]Best Attorneys, Advocates, lawyers to assist you in your Court Custody matter. When is the best time to get them involved in your case? Adv. Muhammad Abduroaf[/caption]

Do you require a video legal advice consultation?

Click here and schedule one today!