A woman who was fed-up with her husband’s lack of ambition for not studying further to improve his earning capacity as well as his alleged infidelity, failed in a legal bid for him to forfeit his share of their house and other benefits upon divorce.
The woman who has a prominent position in local government, said during their marriage she managed to obtain several further degrees, found good jobs and contributed far more financially than the husband.
This, while her husband was satisfied with his bachelor's degree in education.
The woman told the Limpopo High Court that she was employed as a teacher at a certain college for training teachers after completing the B.Ed degree in 1994. She later joined government and rose to the level of a director in one of the departments.
She holds several postgraduate qualifications and a Master's degree whereas her husband had not progressed beyond a bachelor's degree in education. He once enrolled for his honours degree, but then gave up
The parties met at the University of the North (now University of Limpopo) in the late 1980’s while studying towards a B.Ed degree.
Their love relationship started then. Both graduated in 1994 and while the wife pursued her career, the husband struggled to get employment in his line of study. He later obtained a job at a brewery but resigned and opened his own bar with his pension money. This business failed and he got another job.
The wife said she meanwhile had worked hard to further her education and managed to ensure a good life for them. She claimed she had to ask her brother to do the handiwork at their house, as her husband did not lift a hand.
The basis for forfeiture was that her husband was not making a meaningful contribution to the joint estate.
This was denied by the husband, who said he did do some handiwork and was solely responsible for the gardening. The defendant also testified that he did contribute towards the bond except during the years he was not working.
He also told the court that he was the one who drove their three children to school throughout their schooling days. One of the children, however, testified that it appeared to her that he was doing it, “without passion because they were talking less and less during those daily trips.”
The husband said his salary had always been far less than his wife’s and that was the reason that his proportional contribution was smaller.
On the pension forfeiture, the main reason offered by the wife was that the husband had failed to improve himself academically to attract better employment opportunities.
She also testified that her husband had extramarital affairs with several women including their former classmate at the university. The husband denied this.
Acting Judge MS Sikhwari said there was no evidence that the husband did not contribute to the family’s finances within his capacity, given the fact that he did earn much less than his wife.
The judge also ruled that the husband’s failure to improve his academic qualification was an irrelevant factor, especially when one took into account the fact that he did try to do an honours degree although he did not go far.
“Not all of us are academics but that does not make those who have no interests in academic qualifications to be mulcted with forfeiture if married to a spouse who is an academic achiever of some note,” the judge said.
The court also found that there was no evidence to prove the husband’s infidelity.
The wife’s forfeiture application was thus turned down.
Pretoria News