Husband fails to prove wife not entitled to 50% share of joint estate

The court has refused to grant an order that a wife should forfeit any benefits from a marriage in community of property. The decision was handed down after her husband failed to prove that she had committed substantial misconduct in their nine-year marriage. In divorce proceedings instituted by the husband, he argued that his wife should forfeit her 50% share of the marital home and 50% of his pension interest in the Government Employees Pension Fund due to financial misconduct on her part and based on the short duration of themarriage.

According to the husband, the parties entered into an antenuptial contract in September 2017 and were subsequently married out of community of property, subject to the accrual system. On this basis, he argued that the wife should forfeit any benefits arising from the accrual. The wife, however, argued that the parties had concluded a valid customary marriage and sought the division of communityproperty.

In challenging the existence of a valid customary marriage, he argued that there was no handing over of the bride to his family. In the determination of the potential forfeiture of marital benefits by the wife, evidence was led that before the marriage, the husband had bought a property in Pretoria North for R190,000. In 2015, while the house was still being built, the husband and one of his children moved into an apartment rented by the wife, joining her and her child.

[paywall]

They cohabited there for two years before their marriage in April 2017. The wife stated that she was responsible for the rent, electricity, and groceries, as well as household duties and care of the children. The evidence of the parties revealed that both contributed to the household expenses.

To finance the construction of the house, the husband obtained a bond and the wife secured three loans in her name, as the husband could not qualify for more credit. The husband also obtained a loan of R50,000 from the wife’s sister and another loan from the wife’s friend. The wife testified that the marital home, initially comprising three bedrooms, was expanded to seven bedrooms with six bathrooms. The husband covered the bond repayments, while the wife paid for six baths and other household expense.

[/paywall]