Dramatic twist in divorce case. By Johan Gagiano*
These are quoted extracts from an article that appeared in the Pretoria News on 23 November 1998 on page 3
 
A four-year High Court battle for a divorce settlement has taken a dramatic turn for a senior medical aid official - he has finally lost not only his wife and his worldly possessions but also his freedom.
(Defendant) (46), of Vereeniging has been jailed for six months by Pretoria High Court Judge (name withheld) for contempt of court.
(Defendant) was also ordered on his release from prison to pay his former wife R3500 a month support for the rest of his life.
An application for leave to appeal against all the judge's rulings, except the final divorce order, was brought before the Pretoria High Court last week. The application was dismissed with costs.
Giving judgement in the appeal application, Judge (name withheld) explained why he might have diverted from court procedure by actively participating in in-depth cross-examination... "In this case, one party was represented by a lawyer assisted by junior and senior counsel while the other had neither representation nor any legal background. She had to be given a fair chance"
Regarding (Defendant's) prison sentence for contempt, the judge dismissed the applicant's claim that it was out of line. Two previous three-month jail sentences in terms of a Rule 43 order (an interim ruling in favour of Mrs (Applicant) for financial help until the case was finally settled) were evaded.
(Defendant's) employer proposed that he resign - just to be reappointed - to qualify for a pension payout to settle legal bills and other outstanding debts, including the Rule 43 arrears. This could actually amount to defeating the ends of justice, the judge said.
The court was told that (Defendant's) financial affairs were in present in such turmoil that he could not even surrender his estate.
 
The above contains only certain extracts from the article but shows the general details.
Applicant's, Defendant's and the Honorable Judge's names were withheld.
* Copyright of the article rests with Pretoria News

A few interesting questions that comes to mind 
1. Was the Defendant in the court case allowed in court in the first rule 43 application against him?
2. Was he allowed to cross-examine his wife at the 1st hearing?
3. Did the court rule for more than his net salary in the court cases like they did in mine?

Buy my eBook " Survive your divorce financially" for only R250

Free!   Fill in my "Divorce Questionnaire" and receive my eBook "Financial Divorce Tips by a Divorcee" for free

Links
Home
About me
eBook Introduction

 
eBook Questions
English Questionnaire
Afrikaans Questionnaire
Buy eBook
Website Links
Contact me
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Egskeidings, onderhoud en die reel 43 in Suid Afrika