JOHANNESBURG - Renewed conversations around whether South African maintenance laws still fit modern family structures, especially blended families, have been sparked following a Western Cape High Court ruling.
The court dealt with a divorce dispute between a couple who had been married for eight years.
When they got married, they each had two children from previous relationships. No children were born of their marriage, and they formed a blended family.
They were married out of community of property, with accrual, and the man had not legally adopted his wife’s children.
The children’s father is alive and active in their lives and pays R7 202 in maintenance.
READ | Here's why you can claim for maintenance from your siblings
The main issue in the divorce proceedings was whether the man, as a stepparent, was obligated to continue to maintain his stepchildren after separation.
The court ordered the man to pay maintenance to the tune of R40 000 and continue covering a range of expenses including rent capped at R35 000, children’s medical expenses not covered by his medical aid, utilities and other household cost while the divorce is still ongoing.
He was also ordered to contribute R1 million towards legal costs, as well as return household furniture and pay for certain electronic appliances.
The order forms part of Rule 43 application which provides temporary relief pending the finalisation of the divorce.
READ | Zuma's pension at risk after R28.9m legal blow
Legal expert Lucia Bugana explained how it's not so much that a stepparent will be liable for maintenance for his stepchildren, but rather an interim maintenance order in this specific matter.
This is to maintain the status quo until the divorce is finalised.
“Obviously the house must continue to function to give anyone a chance to get used to the new, sort of the new normal. If it's a wife, she needs to find a job.
“So the court will say, look, the divorce is not final. Everyone keeps playing the role that they were playing up until the divorce has been finalised,” she explained.
Once the divorce is finalised maintenance responsibilities would typically fall back to the biological parents.
The court heard the children of the wife became accustomed to a high standard of living over the eight years of the couple’s marriage.
They went on luxury holidays, including overseas holidays, lived in a beautiful large house valued at a minimum of R10 million, drove in luxury cars and the children attended private schools, the court papers revealed.
The man’s view was that he did not have a legal duty to maintain them, nor did he undertake or promise to maintain them.
But the court ruled in the woman’s favour.
While Rule 43 may focus on short term stability, Bugane highlighted the strong need to re-examine the South African legal framework.
“The way that society is set up at the moment, there are a lot of blended families, there are a lot of different setups. It's not so much the old way.
“So definitely, I think the law and the courts as well, they are responsible for updating the laws as society changes,”she said.