25.04.2013 Views

key to the study guide - Name

key to the study guide - Name

key to the study guide - Name

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Prerequisites<br />

Prerequisite that<br />

spouses must have<br />

concluded anc prior<br />

<strong>to</strong> marriage<br />

180<br />

. Beaumont v Beaumont in your prescribed casebook 225±230<br />

. Kritzinger v Kritzinger in your prescribed casebook 232±238<br />

. Katz v Katz in your prescribed casebook 239±244<br />

CONTENT OF THIS STUDY UNIT<br />

1 THE INTRODUCTION OF REDISTRIBUTION AS A REFORMATIVE AND<br />

REMEDIAL MEASURE<br />

As we mentioned above in <strong>study</strong> unit 12 (``The accrual system''),<br />

complete separation of property was often very prejudicial <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> wife. In<br />

cases where she was occupied at home as a housewife and mo<strong>the</strong>r for most<br />

of her married life, and was <strong>the</strong>refore not able <strong>to</strong> accumulate an estate of<br />

her own, <strong>the</strong> financial position in which she was left on <strong>the</strong> eventual<br />

dissolution of <strong>the</strong> marriage could be most unfavourable. Although <strong>the</strong><br />

accrual system has brought relief for spouses married after 1 November<br />

1984, <strong>the</strong> objection still applies <strong>to</strong> marriages contracted out of community<br />

of property and excluding <strong>the</strong> accrual system, prior <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> commencement<br />

of <strong>the</strong> Matrimonial Property Act and <strong>to</strong> marriages entered in<strong>to</strong> in terms of<br />

section 22(6) of <strong>the</strong> Black Administration Act 38 of 1927 prior <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

commencement of <strong>the</strong> Marriage and Matrimonial Property Law Amendment<br />

Act 3 of 1988. You will note in your textbook on pages 133±134<br />

that <strong>the</strong> legislature inserted sections 7(3) <strong>to</strong> 7(6) in <strong>the</strong> Divorce Act <strong>to</strong><br />

bring a measure of relief and <strong>to</strong> counteract <strong>the</strong> injustice that could arise in<br />

<strong>the</strong>se cases. In terms of <strong>the</strong>se sections <strong>the</strong> court is empowered in specified<br />

circumstances <strong>to</strong> make an order that <strong>the</strong> assets or part of <strong>the</strong> assets of one<br />

spouse (usually <strong>the</strong> wealthier spouse) be transferred <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r (usually<br />

<strong>the</strong> poorer spouse).<br />

2 THE PREREQUISITES FOR A REDISTRIBUTION ORDER<br />

A spouse may apply for a redistribution order <strong>to</strong>ge<strong>the</strong>r with a decree of<br />

divorce only in specific circumstances. We refer <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong>se circumstances as<br />

<strong>the</strong> prerequisites for <strong>the</strong> granting of a redistribution order. These prerequisites<br />

are set out on page 134 of your prescribed textbook. You must<br />

ensure that you know when a spouse who intends <strong>to</strong> divorce may apply <strong>to</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> court for a redistribution order.<br />

One of <strong>the</strong>se prerequisites, namely that <strong>the</strong> spouses must have concluded<br />

an antenuptial contract (anc) prior <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir marriage, is discussed in more<br />

detail on pages 134±136 of your textbook. You will note that this<br />

prerequisite has already featured in various cases where <strong>the</strong> parties entered<br />

in<strong>to</strong> a marriage in terms of section 22(6) of <strong>the</strong> Black Administration Act

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!