Application for discharge or substitution of maintenance order

In a recent High Court matter between Bothma v Bothma (July 2023), JSB and LDB got divorced, and their settlement agreement, endorsed by the Randburg Regional Court, dictated JSB's monthly maintenance payments of R30,000, subject to specific conditions. JSB adhered to this until April 2020 when payments ceased. JSB then sought complete discharge of obligations under the agreement, initiating legal proceedings in June 2020. The Magistrate granted this discharge in June 2021, citing JSB's reduced earning capacity due to illness and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The problems with the Magistrate's decision, as identified on appeal, were multifaceted. Firstly, there was a lack of foundation for the Magistrate's findings, with no reliable evidence supporting JSB's claimed decrease in earning capacity. Additionally, the Magistrate failed to consider the terms of the settlement agreement, treating the case as an ordinary civil trial rather than a maintenance inquiry.

The appellate court emphasized the importance of proper procedures in maintenance cases, highlighting the detailed procedures outlined in the Maintenance Act. It criticized the lack of a maintenance investigation, failure to define the dispute's terms, and the absence of a reliable set of financial information. The court noted that the Magistrate's approach led to a lengthy and inefficient process, contrary to the Act's objective of a quick and cost-effective resolution.

In analyzing the evidence, the court found JSB's income evidence unreliable, relying on self-produced documents without independent verification. It pointed out critical shortcomings and contradictions in the information presented. Furthermore, JSB failed to establish a baseline for their income at the time of the settlement agreement.

Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, and the Magistrate's decision was set aside. The court substituted a new order, suspending JSB's maintenance obligations only for the period between April and September 2020. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs in the proceedings. The cross-appeal by JSB, seeking backdating of the discharge to June 2020, was dismissed.