Better Late Than Never: Marriage Law Drags Itself into the 21st Century
For decades, South African law used the husband’s legal home at the time of marriage to decide which country’s law governed a couple’s financial and property rights when they had ties to more than one country. A recent Western Cape High Court judgment declared that rule unconstitutional and introduced a gender-neutral framework for deciding which country’s law applies. Courts elsewhere in the country are not bound by the judgment but are likely to follow it.
A Pothole Causes You to Crash. Can You Sue the Government?
In most cases hitting a pothole results in a damaged tyre or wheel. But for one unfortunate motorcyclist who hit a 60cm behemoth near George, it meant losing a leg. The High Court held the Department of Infrastructure liable for his damages, finding that the roads authority had failed to detect, repair or warn road users about a dangerous defect it knew, or should have known, about.
Can Your Neighbour’s CCTV Camera Point into Your Property?
Home security cameras are increasingly common, but protecting your property does not give you an unrestricted right to monitor your neighbours. A dispute between Cape Town neighbours has clarified where the line may be drawn. The bottom line? CCTV surveillance of a neighbour’s private spaces can infringe their constitutional rights to privacy and dignity.
Cancelled Sale, Damaged Property. Who Pays?
When a sale falls through, most people assume restitution means simply giving back the money and the property. A recent High Court decision shows it is rarely that straightforward, particularly if the property itself has changed in the interim. The ruling explains how restoration costs should be worked out, and why the condition of the property when occupation begins can matter years later.
Can Family Conflict Kibosh a Trust?
When a trust’s founder dies, families often assume that whatever they said they wanted will be honoured, even if the trust deed was never changed to reflect it. A recent Supreme Court of Appeal decision confirms that this is not how trusts work. What governs a trust after the founder’s death is the trust deed itself, not the wishes they expressed at family meetings in their final years.