E. Jorge Attorneys & Conveyancers

12/02/2026

Who Is Entitled to Maintenance?

Children

Both parents have a legal duty to support their children, in proportion to their financial means.
This duty does not automatically end at 18 and continues until the child becomes self-supporting.

Spouses
During marriage, spouses owe each other financial support.
After divorce, a court may order rehabilitative maintenance to help a spouse become financially independent.

Parents & Grandparents
In certain circumstances, the duty of support can extend:
• From grandparents to grandchildren
• From adult children to parents in need

💼 What Does Maintenance Cover?
Maintenance is not just “grocery money.” It can include:
✔️ Housing & utilities
✔️ Food & clothing
✔️ Medical & dental expenses
✔️ Education & training

📌 How Is It Calculated?
The golden rule:
Maintenance is determined by balancing the needs of the person claiming it and the financial means of the person who must pay it.
Every situation is unique — and proper legal guidance can make a significant difference.

If you need assistance with:
• Applying for maintenance
• Opposing an unfair claim
• Varying an existing order
• Divorce-related maintenance disputes

Our firm is here to help.

📞 Contact us for professional advice and representation.
Because maintenance isn’t about punishment — it’s about protection and fairness.

10/02/2026

Before you say ‘I do’, it’s important to understand the legal consequences of your marriage.💍⚖️

One option many couples hear about, but don’t always fully understand, is the Accrual system.

What is “Accrual”?

Accrual refers to the growth in value of each spouse’s estate during the marriage.

👉 It measures how much each spouse’s estate grows from the wedding day to the end of the marriage.

Why does the Accrual system exist?
The goal is fairness.
It ensures that both spouses share equally in the wealth they build together during the marriage, while still protecting what each person brought into the marriage.

How is Accrual calculated?
When the marriage ends:
• Each spouse’s estate growth is calculated
• The spouse with the smaller growth has a claim against the other spouse
• That claim is half the difference between the two accrual amounts

What is excluded from Accrual?
Certain assets are not included in the calculation, including:
• Assets specifically excluded in your Antenuptial Contract (ANC)
• Inheritances, donations, or legacies received from third parties during the marriage
• Compensation for non-patrimonial loss, such as pain and suffering

These exclusions protect personal and pre-marital assets 🛡️
⚠️ A common (and costly) mistake
The value of each spouse’s estate at the start of the marriage must be declared in the ANC
If it’s not declared, the law assumes it was zero — which can have serious financial consequences later on.

📌 Understanding accrual before you say “I do” can save a lot of confusion—and conflict—down the line.

09/02/2026

💍 I DO… Be careful!
An engagement has legal consequences.
✅ When an engagement is legally valid
• Both parties must have legal capacity
You usually need to be 18 or older. Minors need parental consent
• Consent must be free and voluntary
Both people must agree willingly — no pressure or manipulation.
• The engagement must be lawful
If one person is already married, the engagement is invalid.

⚠️ When an engagement can be cancelled
• Mistake
You were seriously mistaken about who you were agreeing to marry.
• Misrepresentation
Important facts were hidden or misrepresented
• Pressure or coercion
If someone was forced, threatened, or emotionally pressured into saying yes.

💔 Breaking an engagement
If one person ends the engagement without a valid reason, it may be considered a breach of promise, however when there is a just cause, the engagement can usually be ended without financial consequences.

💰 Money can be claimed for:
• Actual financial losses
Costs already paid for wedding preparations
• Sentimental damages
Only if the engagement was ended in an extremely humiliating or cruel way

05/02/2026

Help is available if you or someone you care for are victims of abuse.

04/02/2026

There is a vital difference between a protection order and a restraining order. Know the difference contact our offices to assist you

11/09/2025

Wills week 15 - 19 September
Make an appointment now 📅
What to bring
1) Your ID and details of your intended heirs
2) List of items you wish to bequeath to specific people

10/09/2025

15 - 19 September is Wills week. Our offices can assist with drafting of a free basic will book now

10/09/2025

Wills Week 15 - 19 September 2025

05/09/2025

We are very proud of Lynn-Mari Schoonwinkel who was admitted as an Attorney today

09/05/2025

We are very proud of Lynn-Mari Schoonwinkel she successfully passed all her attorneys board examinations and will be admitted to practice soon 🎉🥳

01/01/2025

City and Atlantic Real Estate ta Remax Living v Smith [2024] ZAWCHC 426

[http://saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2024/426.html](http://saflii.org/za/cases/ZAWCHC/2024/426.html)

A simplified breakdown of the case and its implications:

Background:

Property Sellers:The Smiths.

Estate Agents Involved:RE/MAX Living and Kapstadt Properties.

Buyer:Mr. Pears.

Timeline of Events:

1. Joint Mandate:The Smiths gave both RE/MAX Living and Kapstadt Properties the authority to market and sell their property.

2. Initial Offer:RE/MAX Living introduced Mr. Pears to the property. He made an offer, but it was below the Smiths' asking price, so they declined.

3. Second Attempt:Kapstadt Properties found another buyer, and the Smiths accepted an offer of R24 million. However, this deal fell through due to the buyer's personal issues.

4. Final Sale:Mr. Pears, initially introduced by RE/MAX Living, made a new offer of R24 million, which the Smiths accepted. This time, the transaction was facilitated through Kapstadt Properties.

Dispute:

Both RE/MAX Living and Kapstadt Properties claimed they were the main reason ("effective cause") for the sale and thus entitled to the commission. RE/MAX Living took the matter to court, seeking R966,000 in commission.

Court's Decision:

The court determined that RE/MAX Living was the "effective cause" of the sale because:

They initially introduced Mr. Pears to the property.

Their efforts were significant in Mr. Pears' decision to purchase.

As a result, the Smiths were ordered to pay the commission to RE/MAX Living.

Key Takeaways:

Effective Cause Principle:
In real estate, the agent whose actions are the primary reason for a sale is entitled to the commission, even if another agent finalizes the deal.

Seller's Responsibility:
Sellers should be aware of their interactions with multiple agents to avoid commission disputes.

Clear Agreements:
It's crucial for all parties to have clear, written agreements outlining roles and commission entitlements to prevent misunderstandings.

This case highlights the importance of understanding how estate agent commissions work, especially when multiple agents are involved in a property sale.

CASE NO.: 7118/2023