100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Rdl1008W - Introduction to Family law notes R203,32
Add to cart

Class notes

Rdl1008W - Introduction to Family law notes

 9 views  0 purchase

This is a comprehensive and detailed note on Introduction to Family law for Rdl 1008W. Quality stuff!! U'll need it!!

Preview 2 out of 5  pages

  • May 20, 2024
  • 5
  • 2018/2019
  • Class notes
  • Prof. k. moult
  • All classes
All documents for this subject (10)
avatar-seller
anyiamgeorge19
Introduction to Family Law

Dawood v Minister of Home Affairs
 Links marriage and dignity
 Consortium omnis vitae as crucial part of marriage
o rights and duties arising from marriage, such as love, companionship,
cohabitation, intimacy
 Private and public importance of marriage
o Social institution
o Special, but not exclusively so
 Protection of marriage from unjustified state interference

Children in Family Law

LvH
 Minor parents-to-be
 Father (A) of mother-to-be (M) wanted to prohibit would-be father (F) from
contacting her
 M lived at home with her parents
 When natural guardian fulfilling functions, no room for interference by court
 Question whether A was exercising authority reasonably
 F character of ill-repute; drugs user, admission to psychiatric hospital
 A had been exercising authority reasonably
 Should child being born illegitimate be a factor?
o No, may not happen, and even if contact allowed no guarantee of marriage
between its parents

FS v JJ
 Rights of unmarried fathers
 Best interests of child paramount
o Evidenced in this case by psychologists’ reports
 Importance of mediation in family matters

Grootboom
 Duty of care for child falls on parents

Introduction to Marriage Law

Excell v Douglas
 Requires valid civil marriage
 Must be a joint household for spouses to be able to bind each other contractually for
necessaries
 Duty of support if couples separated
o However, does not apply if one couple is at fault and wants to claim support
 If spouse has provided allowance, cannot have unjustified enrichment claim brought
by third party

Reloomel v Ramsey
 Valid civil marriage
 Joint household

,  Spouses can bind in contract only if items purchased are necessaries
o What constitutes necessaries determined by standard of living
 Spouses cannot forbid purchase of necessaries, not bound in agency
 Even if one spouse temporarily absent, duty still exists

Gumede v President RSA
 Monogamous customary marriages should be deemed to be in community of property
(excluding ANC)
 Retrospective
 S 8(4)(a) of RCMA permitted courts to transfer assets in divorce per s 7(3) of Divorce
Act
o S 7(3) usually only applicable to those out of community of property and
married before MPA, however limitations do not apply in case of customary
marriages (although is this the case too with when legislation came into effect,
or does this still only apply to those married before the accrual system?)
 Women married in terms of customary law always have s 7(3) benefit, common law
not, incongruent with s 9(1) - Heaton

Family Support Duties

Bannatyne v Bannatyne
 Gendered nature of maintenance system
 Economic impact of divorce, husbands tend to leave marriage richer than wives
 Necessity of maintenance to relieve this financial burden


Gammon v McClure
 Spouse liable for unjustified enrichment if third party has supported needy spouse
 Subsists as long as marriage lasts



Management of the Joint Estate

Distillers’ Corp v Modise
 Limits of reasonableness in ascertaining whether party was forbidden to stand surety
 Court found that Distillers’ Corp had been bona fide third party in trusting Modise
 However, criticised by commentators who think Corp should have investigated

Visser v Hull
 In the Visser v Hull case67 Mr Visser ‘sold’ the family home to his cousins. The house
was worth R98 000, but the sale price was only R10 500. The court decided that this
was really a donation68 (of about R87 500). It seemed to the court that a donation of
this value was prejudicial to Mrs Visser’s interests in the joint estate and that the
donation therefore fell within the scope of section 15(8). In terms of section 15(3)(c),
this donation required Mrs Visser’s consent.


Bopape v Moloto

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying this summary from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller anyiamgeorge19. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy this summary for R203,32. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

50064 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now

Start selling
R203,32
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added