FAMILY LAW(2601) EXAM PACK
BENEDICTION
, CASES TO BE EXAMINED
1.Brookstein v Brookstein:
The value of a divorcing spouse’s estate for purposes of determining the accrual must be
determined on the date when the divorce order is made.
2.Moola vs Aulsebrook:
Applicant & her deceased husband went through marriage ceremony solemnised in accordance
with Islamic rites by a priest who was not duly appointed as a marriage officer. (neither spouse
was aware of that fact) They had 7 children – children couldn’t inherit from father because was
seen as born from unmarried parents. Argument was that marriage was putative marriage even
though statutory requirements for solemnisation of marriage had not been complied with –
Application was granted.
3.Bannatyne vs Bannatyne:
The constitutional court held that contempt of court proceedings are appropriate constitutional
relief for the enforcement of a claim for the maintenance of children (if the legislative remedies
are in some way deficient.
4.Ex Parte Dow:
Applicant wanted marriage declared null & void, because the marriage took place in a garden –
The judge found nothing wrong with a marriage in a garden – application failed.
5. Daniels v Campbell:
The constitutional court held that a surviving spouse in a monogamous Hindu & Muslim
marriage qualifies as a spouse and survivor in terms of Intestate Succession Act and
Maintenance of Surviving spouse Act.
6. AM v RM
Court granted a Muslim woman’s application for maintenance pendente lite in terms of rule 43 of
the Uniform Rules of court even though the spouses never entered into a civil marriage.
7. Zulu vs Zulu
Applicant entered into Civil Marriage ICOP. Husband already in Civil marriage ICOP with
another woman, Only discovered at husband’s death – Due to her not knowing, she claimed
marriage to be putative and she was entitled to ½ estate – Court dismissed application. No
matrimonial system can operate in a void marriage.
BENEDICTION
, CASES TO BE EXAMINED
1.Brookstein v Brookstein:
The value of a divorcing spouse’s estate for purposes of determining the accrual must be
determined on the date when the divorce order is made.
2.Moola vs Aulsebrook:
Applicant & her deceased husband went through marriage ceremony solemnised in accordance
with Islamic rites by a priest who was not duly appointed as a marriage officer. (neither spouse
was aware of that fact) They had 7 children – children couldn’t inherit from father because was
seen as born from unmarried parents. Argument was that marriage was putative marriage even
though statutory requirements for solemnisation of marriage had not been complied with –
Application was granted.
3.Bannatyne vs Bannatyne:
The constitutional court held that contempt of court proceedings are appropriate constitutional
relief for the enforcement of a claim for the maintenance of children (if the legislative remedies
are in some way deficient.
4.Ex Parte Dow:
Applicant wanted marriage declared null & void, because the marriage took place in a garden –
The judge found nothing wrong with a marriage in a garden – application failed.
5. Daniels v Campbell:
The constitutional court held that a surviving spouse in a monogamous Hindu & Muslim
marriage qualifies as a spouse and survivor in terms of Intestate Succession Act and
Maintenance of Surviving spouse Act.
6. AM v RM
Court granted a Muslim woman’s application for maintenance pendente lite in terms of rule 43 of
the Uniform Rules of court even though the spouses never entered into a civil marriage.
7. Zulu vs Zulu
Applicant entered into Civil Marriage ICOP. Husband already in Civil marriage ICOP with
another woman, Only discovered at husband’s death – Due to her not knowing, she claimed
marriage to be putative and she was entitled to ½ estate – Court dismissed application. No
matrimonial system can operate in a void marriage.
