Gauteng Court's landmark ruling on interim maintenance in Muslim divorces
Interim maintenance rights in Muslim divorces came under the spotlight in the Johannesburg High Court.
Image: File
The Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg has addressed the critical question of a woman's entitlement to interim maintenance from her husband under Muslim law.
Previously, the court denied her Rule 43 application for interim maintenance, ruling that the marriage had ended via talaq (an Islamic divorce), rendering the parties ineligible for such maintenance as they were no longer considered spouses.
On appeal, the court, however, ruled in favour of the woman on this point in law. It pointed out that the amended Divorce Act applies to all Muslim marriages subsisting after December 15, 2014, regardless of religious termination.
The court said talaq does not preclude a spouse from instituting a civil divorce action and invoking Rule 43 interim protections. “Spouse” in Rule 43 must be interpreted purposively and harmoniously to include a party to a Muslim marriage notwithstanding a prior talaq,” the court said.
The parties were married in accordance with Sharia Law in November 2020, which is automatically out of community of property. The husband issued the wife with a series of talaqs between February 2021 and March 2022.
Despite the issuing of the talaqs, the parties remained living in their matrimonial home and as husband and wife, and in November 2021, a daughter was born of this union. During March 2022, the Jamiatul Ulama (the Council of Muslim Theologians) at the instance of both parties issued a ruling confirming the existence of an irrevocable talaq.
The wife, in turn, argued that notwithstanding the issuing of the talaq during April 2021, the marriage remained recognised at civil law. She subsequently brought the Rule 43 application in which the husband’s argument that there was no marriage was upheld. It was against this order that she appealed the issues before a full court (three judges).
The court pointed out that the Constitutional Court delivered judgment in June 2022 regarding the protection of women and children in Muslim marriages. The Court held the Marriage and Divorce Acts and the common law to be unconstitutional to the extent that they did not recognise Muslim marriages.
The suggestion was meanwhile made on behalf of the husband that a wife must institute action before the divorce under Sharia law in order to enjoy the rights afforded her and her children under the Divorce Act.
The court, in rejecting this argument, said this principle can be described as “first come first served” – whichever spouse institutes divorce, be it under Sharia Law or civil law, determines the choice of law between Sharia Law and civil law.
The court commented that there can be no doubt that the amendment to the law was for the purposes of protecting women and children from any unconstitutional consequences of a talaq.