Divorce can be a costly matter, especially if the parties nitpick every aspect of their divorce, says a Pretoria News report. A woman, who asked the court to order her estranged husband to contribute nearly R2.5m towards her legal fees, found this out in the Gauteng High Court (Pretoria).

This is especially the position if both parties are using senior counsel for their drawn out divorce, the court heard.

The woman earlier obtained an order that her husband had to contribute R30 000 towards her legal costs. She now returned to court to ask for an order that the husband pay the further contribution towards her legal costs. This is for the legal costs that the applicant allegedly incurred up to and including the first day of the divorce trial.

In the opening to this judgment, Acting Judge C Marumoage remarked that this case highlights an unfortunate trend by some litigants in matrimonial matters who are legally represented and appear to have access to financial resources to litigate various aspects of their disputes before their marriages are dissolved by the courts.

‘This case demonstrates how expensive family-related disputes can be when parties do not negotiate in good faith to reach reasonable and amicable solutions.’

The judge said this is particularly so when parties actively attempt to understate their incomes and hide their assets.

‘Inevitably, this leads to different court actions and applications where parties pursue avoidable litigation against each other at great cost. When parties fail to sensibly resolve their matrimonial disputes, they will be unnecessarily stripped of their much-needed financial resources. Ultimately, legal representatives become the real financial beneficiaries of this litigious behaviour.’

The judge concluded that the evidence before the court points to the fact that the applicant can pay for her legal fees from her business operations, says the Pretoria News report.

Marumoage added that it cannot be denied that in a society such as SA – with established income disparities and discrimination between men and women within marriages – courts should protect financially vulnerable women when so required.

It cannot be doubted that financially weaker spouses are usually women who are confronted by financially stronger spouses, usually men, who use their financial muscle to financially disadvantage them in matrimonial litigation. 

However, the judge added, in recent times and with the advancement of women in various workplaces and sectors, there are exceptions to the general rule. 

The applicant in this case does not seem to be economically disadvantaged, the court said in turning down her application.

Full Pretoria News report in The Star

Judgment