lOMoARcPSD|4967630
PVL2601-case summaries family law
Family Law (University of South Africa)
StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university
Downloaded by Rudi Boer ()
, lOMoARcPSD|4967630
CASE FACTS / APPLICABLE TO
F:- Applicant wanted marriage declared null & void, because the
marriage took place in a garden – The judge found nothing wrong
Ex Parte Dow with a marriage in a garden – application failed
A:- Prescribed marriage formalities (during ceremony)
Void, voidable and F:- Applicant & her deceased husband went through marriage
ceremony solemnised in accordance with Islamic rites by a priest
putative marriages who was not duly appointed as a marriage officer. (neither spouse
Requirements for a was aware of that fact) They had 7 children – children couldn’t
putative (assumed, Moola vs inherit from father because was seen as born from unmarried
Aulsebrook parents. Argument was that marriage was putative marriage even
acknowledged, accepted) though statutory requirements for solemnisation of marriage had
marriage not been complied with – Application was granted.
A:- Requirements for a putative marriage
Patrimonial consequence Applicant entered into Civil Marriage ICOP. Husband already in
Civil marriage ICOP with another woman, Only discovered at
of a putative marriage husband’s death – Due to her not knowing, she claimed marriage
Zulu vs Zulu to be putative and she was entitled to ½ estate – Court dismissed
application. No matrimonial system can operate in a void marriage
Household necessaries F:- Deals with basis of one spouse’s liability for goods other
– Termination of joint
spouse purchased on credit while there was no common
household between them. One spouse has capacity to bind other
household & if marriage is in comm. of prop., the joint estate, for household
goods only if 3 req are met:-
* Must be valid marriage between partners
Excell vs * Parties must share joint household
Douglas * Transaction in Q must relate to household necessaries
If req met – binds spouse in contractual nature
But once joint household comes to an end – one spouse cant bind
other in contractual nature
A:- Household necessaries – Termination of joint
household
Household necessaries F:- Factors which have to be taken into account such as spouse’s
– How its determined
standard of living etc. Should court take subjective / objective
approach. In this case took subjective = viewed from perspective
whether something is of the dealer. Takes into account factors of which the dealer was
a household necessary Reloomel vs aware / ought to have been aware.
Ramsay (Objective approach = court takes into account all other factors
without paying attention to what dealer knew about factors.
A:- Household necessaries – How its determined whether
something is a household necessary
The Maintenance Act F:- After divorce, father accepted to pay maintenance & keep
children on his medical scheme. But, failed to pay maintenance, so
99 of 1998 went to Maint Court to reduce payment amount. Succeeded. But
(enforcement of still failed to make payment & took children of his medical
maintenance orders) scheme, refusing to pay for their medical cover.
Bannatyne vs The constitutional court held that contempt of court proceedings
Bannatyne are appropriate constitutional relief for the enforcement of a claim
for the maintenance of children (if the legislative remedies are in
some way deficient)
A:- The Maintenance Act 99 of 1998 (enforcement of
maintenance orders)
Downloaded by Rudi Boer ()
PVL2601-case summaries family law
Family Law (University of South Africa)
StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university
Downloaded by Rudi Boer ()
, lOMoARcPSD|4967630
CASE FACTS / APPLICABLE TO
F:- Applicant wanted marriage declared null & void, because the
marriage took place in a garden – The judge found nothing wrong
Ex Parte Dow with a marriage in a garden – application failed
A:- Prescribed marriage formalities (during ceremony)
Void, voidable and F:- Applicant & her deceased husband went through marriage
ceremony solemnised in accordance with Islamic rites by a priest
putative marriages who was not duly appointed as a marriage officer. (neither spouse
Requirements for a was aware of that fact) They had 7 children – children couldn’t
putative (assumed, Moola vs inherit from father because was seen as born from unmarried
Aulsebrook parents. Argument was that marriage was putative marriage even
acknowledged, accepted) though statutory requirements for solemnisation of marriage had
marriage not been complied with – Application was granted.
A:- Requirements for a putative marriage
Patrimonial consequence Applicant entered into Civil Marriage ICOP. Husband already in
Civil marriage ICOP with another woman, Only discovered at
of a putative marriage husband’s death – Due to her not knowing, she claimed marriage
Zulu vs Zulu to be putative and she was entitled to ½ estate – Court dismissed
application. No matrimonial system can operate in a void marriage
Household necessaries F:- Deals with basis of one spouse’s liability for goods other
– Termination of joint
spouse purchased on credit while there was no common
household between them. One spouse has capacity to bind other
household & if marriage is in comm. of prop., the joint estate, for household
goods only if 3 req are met:-
* Must be valid marriage between partners
Excell vs * Parties must share joint household
Douglas * Transaction in Q must relate to household necessaries
If req met – binds spouse in contractual nature
But once joint household comes to an end – one spouse cant bind
other in contractual nature
A:- Household necessaries – Termination of joint
household
Household necessaries F:- Factors which have to be taken into account such as spouse’s
– How its determined
standard of living etc. Should court take subjective / objective
approach. In this case took subjective = viewed from perspective
whether something is of the dealer. Takes into account factors of which the dealer was
a household necessary Reloomel vs aware / ought to have been aware.
Ramsay (Objective approach = court takes into account all other factors
without paying attention to what dealer knew about factors.
A:- Household necessaries – How its determined whether
something is a household necessary
The Maintenance Act F:- After divorce, father accepted to pay maintenance & keep
children on his medical scheme. But, failed to pay maintenance, so
99 of 1998 went to Maint Court to reduce payment amount. Succeeded. But
(enforcement of still failed to make payment & took children of his medical
maintenance orders) scheme, refusing to pay for their medical cover.
Bannatyne vs The constitutional court held that contempt of court proceedings
Bannatyne are appropriate constitutional relief for the enforcement of a claim
for the maintenance of children (if the legislative remedies are in
some way deficient)
A:- The Maintenance Act 99 of 1998 (enforcement of
maintenance orders)
Downloaded by Rudi Boer ()
