Because a formal marriage ceremony is not concluded, individuals in life partnerships do not benefit from laws that apply to married people.

This was argued by the Women's Legal Centre, which appeared before the Constitutional Court as one of two amici curiae in support of an application by domestic worker Jane Bwanya.

She wants the court to confirm an order by the Western Cape High Court that the Intestate Succession Act is unconstitutional because it does not allow for surviving partners in opposite-sex life partnerships to inherit from their late partners' estates.

A TimesLIVE report notes the court, which reserved judgment, heard that Bwanya was ‘swept off her feet’ by a relatively wealthy businessman, Anthony Ruch, in 2014.

They were in a permanent life partnership until Ruch (57) died in April 2016 – before the couple could get married.

He did not leave a will, and the heir he had appointed was his mother, who had died in 2013. The deceased estate comprised, among other things, R6.7m from the sale of his Camps Bay house by the executor.

Bwanya wanted to claim from the estate as a surviving spouse but the executor rejected her claim, sparking the High Court action.

However, before the challenge was heard, Bwanya reached a settlement with the executors of the estate and she received R3m in full and final settlement.

Women in life partnerships were more vulnerable due to the absence of legal consequences when those relationships ended, counsel for the Women's Legal Centre, Ashleigh Christians, told the court.

She said the absence of legal recognition for life partnerships constituted indirect discrimination on the basis of race and gender, notes TimesLIVE. She said statistics showed that black women were particularly vulnerable and deserving of legal protection as the numbers of life partnerships have almost tripled from 1996 – when there were 1.2m partnerships – to 2011 when there were 3.5m partnerships.

Counsel for Bwanya, Robert Stelzner SC, said the case was about benefits which were not extended to survivors of heterosexual life partnerships, but were available for survivors of same-sex life partnerships.

‘This has created a differentiation between same-sex life partners and heterosexual life partners.’

He said a survivor in a same-sex life partnership was allowed to inherit under the Intestate Succession Act, while a survivor in the opposite-sex life partnership cannot inherit.

Mushahida Adhikari, counsel for the second friend of the court, the Commission for Gender Equality, said the case was about the constitutional place of couples who do not marry, whether by choice or not.

She said the Act differentiates between persons based on marital status, gender and sex, and sexual orientation and said the differentiation amounted to discrimination.

Counsel for the Minister of Justice, Karrisha Pillay, said the Minister will abide by the decision of the court.

Full TimesLIVE report