Cheating wife loses all benefits including husband’s pension, assets in divorce

[schumi]

Pretoria - A now divorced woman has discovered that if you cheat on your spouse, you lose.

The court ruled that she would forfeit half of her husband’s pension money because she left him and the children for other men.

The woman, who cannot be identified as the matter involves a divorce action, went to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, to divorce her husband. She also asked that half of her husband’s pension be paid to her.

The husband, in turn, said his “cheating wife” should not get a cent and that the half of his government pension fund – to which a spouse married in community of property is usually entitled – should be forfeited due to her conduct over the years.

More at: https://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news...-divorce-e56a480b-74f9-4952-aa63-01470736fa01

 

[Splinter]

About frikken time....

 

[Kosmik]

Read that this morning, good.

A divorce should be fair but this one doesnt deserve ****. Also I think general infedility when married should be grounds for loss etc. If you are unhappy, say so and do a divorce beforehand, why betray someone whom you obviously had feelings for before in such a harsh manner.

 

[My_King]

Yoh, finally

 

[Pegasus]

 

[rvZA]

It will be thrown out on appeal and in the concourt. Our courts do not like a single person owning all the money. The high court deviated a bit from the socialist movement and will be corrected soon.

 

[3WA]

Now we just need some dude to start a business where we can hire him to seduce our wives prior to initiating a divorce.

 

[epah]

Thats what you get for being a cheating sluttt whorre.

 

[Alton Turner Blackwood]

Good, ****ing bitch thought she's going to get a windfall. I hope the judge hits her with costs so she has to pay his legal counsel as well!

 

[Grubscrew]

Would love to read the judgement. But I do like ruling.

 

[TelkomUseless]

Damn.. that is one good divorce lawyer.

spouse married in community of property = equal split according to law. Surprise that she got verdict against it.

 

[Sensorei]

Now we just need some dude to start a business where we can hire him to seduce our wives prior to initiating a divorce.

Hook, Line and Sink Her (Pty) Ltd - Ph. 0800 CHEATERS

 

[Pegasus]

It will be thrown out on appeal and in the concourt. Our courts do not like a single person owning all the money. The high court deviated a bit from the socialist movement and will be corrected soon.

 

[DreamKing]

Cheating husband? Same?

 

[TelkomUseless]

Cheating husband? Same?

What is good for the goose...

 

[Bigjay84]

She's lucky the court didn't order her to be branded with a large "A"

 

[ForceFate]

It will be thrown out on appeal and in the concourt. Our courts do not like a single person owning all the money. The high court deviated a bit from the socialist movement and will be corrected soon.

What do you mean by this?

 

[rvZA]

What do you mean by this?

I mean....

Years ago, you could sue the third party for adultery in South Africa and you would get limited damages awarded in courts.

But, in 2014, in the case of RH v DE, the Supreme Court of Appeal decided that such an action for damages has become outdated and that the law could no longer support such a claim. The matter then went to the Concourt. Unanimously, the Constitutional Court decided that adultery by a third party lacks wrongfulness for a delictual claim for injury or insult to self-esteem (contumelia) and loss of comfort and society (consortium) and that it is not reasonable to ascribe delictual liability to it.

The concourt ruled Adultery should no longer be punished through a civil damages claim. It is the commitment of spouses to maintain their marriage and not the responsibility of the law.

So, the high court was wrong in awarding this against the cheating spouse. She should still have access to all this. The concourt demands the sharing even with a cheating spouse.

The Appeal and Concourt will fix the ruling soon. The judges is trying to overthrow a concourt ruling and in a real society this is a serious breach from a lower court.

 

[ForceFate]

I mean....

Years ago, you could sue the third party for adultery in South Africa and you would get limited damages awarded in courts.

But, in 2014, in the case of RH v DE, the Supreme Court of Appeal decided that such an action for damages has become outdated and that the law could no longer support such a claim. The matter then went to the Concourt. Unanimously, the Constitutional Court decided that adultery by a third party lacks wrongfulness for a delictual claim for injury or insult to self-esteem (contumelia) and loss of comfort and society (consortium) and that it is not reasonable to ascribe delictual liability to it.

The concourt ruled Adultery should no longer be punished through a civil damages claim. It is the commitment of spouses to maintain their marriage and not the responsibility of the law.

So, the high court was wrong in awarding this against the cheating spouse. She should still have access to all this. The concourt demands the sharing even with a cheating spouse.

The Appeal and Concourt will fix the ruling soon. The judges is trying to overthrow a concourt ruling and in a real society this is a serious breach from a lower court.

But this still doesn't answer my question.

 

[LandyMan]

I mean....

Years ago, you could sue the third party for adultery in South Africa and you would get limited damages awarded in courts.

But, in 2014, in the case of RH v DE, the Supreme Court of Appeal decided that such an action for damages has become outdated and that the law could no longer support such a claim. The matter then went to the Concourt. Unanimously, the Constitutional Court decided that adultery by a third party lacks wrongfulness for a delictual claim for injury or insult to self-esteem (contumelia) and loss of comfort and society (consortium) and that it is not reasonable to ascribe delictual liability to it.

The concourt ruled Adultery should no longer be punished through a civil damages claim. It is the commitment of spouses to maintain their marriage and not the responsibility of the law.

So, the high court was wrong in awarding this against the cheating spouse. She should still have access to all this. The concourt demands the sharing even with a cheating spouse.

The Appeal and Concourt will fix the ruling soon. The judges is trying to overthrow a concourt ruling and in a real society this is a serious breach from a lower court.

I believe you are referring to the right to sue the third party, i.e. in this case, the husband suing all her lovers ... this case is not about the third party, so your reference doesn't hold (In my opinion)