While barriers remain for Muslim women wanting to access assistance through courts in dissolving their marriages, a recent court ruling secured maintenance and medical cover for a Cape Town woman. 

The woman, who sought R12,000, was granted monthly maintenance of R9,000 after her second divorce from the same husband.

After a breakdown in their first Sharia law marriage, the pensioner couple remarried in 2019, but earlier this year, the husband issued his wife a talaq (a written declaration of divorce in terms of Sharia law) in April. 

At some stage in February 2025, the woman left the shared common home in Vasco, Goodwood, and took up residence with one of her adult sons from a previous marriage. She separated from her husband and had left the common home before the issuing of the talaq.

The husband previously paid his wife R11,000 per month, but since February 2025, he has reduced the payments to amounts between R1,500 and R4,000 per month. She was also maintained as a dependent on his medical aid plan, although the plan was changed. 

The husband contended that it was not his responsibility to maintain the applicant, and the responsibility “rests with her two adult sons, in terms of Islamic principles”.

It was his further argument that his responsibility to maintain his wife lapsed on the issuing of the talaq and the conclusion or termination of the applicant’s iddah period (the period a woman must observe after the death of her husband or after a divorce). 

Judge Mas-udah Pangarker noted: “During the course of their marriage and cohabitation, the respondent (husband) provided for the applicant’s (wife) maintenance needs, while she was responsible for the couple’s household, which included cooking meals, ensuring that the two-bedroomed flat was clean and tidy, and other daily and regular household chores and tasks.

“The respondent, aged 63 years at the time the application was launched, was employed […] and retired in February 2025. According to the applicant, she was unaware of his salary and the number of bank accounts he held. From the evidence, it is apparent that the respondent holds three First National Bank (FNB) accounts: a savings account, a smart (current) account, and a money maximiser account (investment).”

Judge Pangarker noted that as recently as May 2024, certain amendments were promulgated and took effect in respect of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979 (Divorce Act), in what the legislature referred to as the Divorce Amendment Act 1 of 2024. 

The husband argued that: “The applicant is no longer my wife. Therefore, an action to dissolve our marriage is moot.”

Judge Pangarker said: “The most significant amendment which was introduced in 2024 to the Divorce Act, 1979 is that it allows for the dissolution of a Muslim marriage concluded in terms of Islamic principles to be dissolved by a High Court or Regional Court’s decree of divorce. Furthermore, the amended Act, 2024 applies to all subsisting Muslim marriages, including a Muslim marriage which was terminated or dissolved in terms of the tenets of Islam… The amendment has retrospective effect in respect of Muslim marriages.

“(She) was well within her rights as a spouse to a Muslim marriage and where a divorce action was pending since March 2025, to institute an application in terms of Rule 43 for interim relief.”

The husband was ordered to pay maintenance to the applicant in the amount of R9,200 per month and for her to remain as a dependent on his medical aid scheme. Concerning their divorce proceedings, the husband was ordered to contribute to his wife’s legal costs in the sum of R30,000 directly into the Trust Account of the wife’s legal representative. 

However, in the Rule 43 application, both parties are liable for their own costs.

Recently, highlighting that barriers remain for women seeking assistance through the courts to dissolve their marriages, attorney Ayesha Royker said these challenges include high costs of litigation. 

Royker shared her comments during the Women’s Legal Centre’s campaign on Women’s Rights in Muslim Marriages. 

“High costs of legal action really is still a deterrent. And because of this, many women still only approach the religious bodies to terminate their marriages,” said Royker. 

chevon.booysen@inl.co.za

Source link