By Lezanne Taylor

Senior Attorney at Johanette Rheeder Inc



Uncertain times calls for certain measures and clearly stipulated rules. Innumerable parents by virtue of South Africa’s government declaring a State of Disaster, in respect of the National State of Disaster Act, Act No. 57 of 2002, has inherited a degree of fear and anxiety. This also being due to the economic downturn and South Africa’s economic grading being “duped” with the classification of “Junk Status”.

Parents, caregivers and co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights are faced with lay-offs; retrenchments and deductions in salary -payments which effectively has an impact on their financial ability to pay and contribute to maintenance.

The question on most parents lips, irrespective whether you are on the receiving or actioning -end, is what would the consequence be of a parent; caregiver or co – holder of parental responsibility and rights either losing their income, being paid a reduction thereof or are retrenched?



An important aspect to this discussion would require a reverting back to the basics. The basics taking us to the Maintenance Act, Act No. 99 of 1998 inclusive of its amendments.  A child is entitled to reasonable maintenance, which maintenance is a term used to describe a parties duty to provide for clothing, housing, dental and medical care, education and training, and, where applicable, recreation.

It is clear from legislation that both parents have a duty to maintain the child/children according to their respective means.  Such duty exists irrespective of whether the child has been adopted or born in/out of wedlock. The Courts in respect of child maintenance ventures on an investigative - journey in regard to the referred to “respective means” of the parties and are ad idem that what is “reasonable” will depend on the family’s (i) standard of living, (ii) their respective income and the (iii) cost of living, the child/children has/have become accustom to. The standard of living usually determines whether expenses for recreation, and secondary- and tertiary-level education will be awarded.

An order in respect of maintaining a child/children may be awarded either by virtue of a divorce order (incorporating the maintenance and contact to the children); or may be an order by a maintenance court by virtue whereof any party acting on behalf of a child, whom has a right to maintenance, may approach the court and institutes proceedings against the other party (parent) for contribution to said maintenance of the child/children.

Once such order has been made by a competent court, having jurisdiction to entertain such matters, the order will remain in existence, until such time, any of the parties approaches a court for a variation, reduction or setting aside of the existing order. A variation may be brought on grounds such as a “material change in financial circumstances”.



The question which thus remains is, what qualifies as a material change in financial circumstances and would a financial loss suffered due to Covid-19 and the subsequent lockdown suffice? It can be argued that the impacts people suffer due.

to Covid-19 may most certainly qualify as a material change in financial circumstances. However, bear in mind that in law and specifically in this relation for instance a Rule 43 - amendment of maintenance order, called a Rule 43(6) Applications, the change/variation will need to be proved by the person alleging such change[1]


Practically, should a party to a maintenance order, either by way of Rule 43; Divorce Order or Maintenance order, fall into a situation wherein he/she is no  longer able meet his/her obligations in terms of the mentioned orders, he/she may approach the relevant court, such as the High Court, Regional Court or the Maintenance Court for a variation, reduction or setting aside of a maintenance order. This action would be possible by virtue of either an application to the High Court or by virtue of completing a Form B (J107) in the Maintenance Court.

It is indeed possible in terms of Section 8 of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979, for a High Court, Regional and Magistrate’s Court to vary an existing maintenance order. The grounds upon which the relevant court, with the necessary jurisdiction, will consider such application for variation, reduction or setting aside, is to determine whether there is sufficient reason to do so.  The court will in regard to a claim based on sufficient reason consider factors such as (1) the respective income of the parties;  (2) the parties ability to contribute or support the child/children and him/her-self; and most importantly (3) the deterioration in the maintenance debtor’s financial position[2]. The court goes further and makes a determination in regard to the deterioration of the debtor’s financial position by investigating whether it is due to circumstances beyond his/her control.

The party brining the application to court, would have to show to the court his/her inability to pay.
In light of the above, the relevant legislation and legal concepts already interpreted by courts, it would appear as though a loss of income or salary reduction, in this case due to the nationwide lockdown, would suffice in proving that sufficient reason exists to vary an existing maintenance order.

An party approaching a court applying for a reduction of a maintenance order would be successful if such Applicant can prove that the party’s (i) income has been reduced;  (ii) the party has lost his/her income;  (iii) or been temporarily or permanently laid off. Further that due to the circumstances pointed out in (i); (ii) or (iii) the party has the inability to pay the current maintenance in terms of the existing maintenance order.


Currently and for the foreseeable future, at least until such time the courts re-open, parties will not be able to approach the court for a variation of, reduction in or setting aside of an existing maintenance order. It is thus important to note that a party under court order for maintenance, should continue paying maintenance until such time a court, with the necessary jurisdiction varies; reduces or sets aside the referred to maintenance order.

Should a party under order to pay maintenance during lockdown or due to Covid-19 unilaterally decide to stop paying maintenance without having a varied order in hand, that party will be held liable to pay any arrears in maintenance which the party failed to pay.

The party whom did not receive the maintenance may on this basis approach a court of law to enforce payment of any arrear maintenance either by way of (1) a warrant of execution (Form O); (2) an emolument attachment order (Form L);  (3)a complaint of failure to comply with a maintenance order (Form Q – J470) or (4) can be found guilty of a criminal offence and be liable on conviction, to a fine or to be imprisoned.



It is thus advisable to continue paying maintenance during lockdown and irrespective the impact of Covid -19. Upon being able to do so and the party applying to court for a variation of an existing maintenance order, being further able to proof a change in financial circumstances, and the court varying the order, then only may a party proceed to pay the varied amount.

26 April 2020

Lezanne Taylor is a senior attorney at Johanette Rheeder Incorporated


[1] Bruni v Bruni [2007] 3 All SA 139 (W).

[2] Hancock v Hancock 1957 (2) SA 500 (C)

You can download this newsletter as a PDF document, or send the link to a friend.
Download as PDF

Upcoming Events

DL12 - Retrenchments & layoffs during Covid-19

Date: 09/06/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

Workplace Bullying

Date: 09/06/2020 12:00:00 PM
Event Type: Webinar
Venue: Office / Home

DL8 - Investigating & Charging in Disciplinary Hearings

Date: 11/06/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

Collective Bargaining Challenges

Date: 16/06/2020 12:00:00 PM
Event Type: Webinar
Venue: Office / Home

DL7 - Managing day to day HR

Date: 18/06/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

DL19 - Protection Of Personal Information Act, POP

Date: 22/06/2020 12:00:00 PM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

DL15 - Organisational rights & Collective bargaining

Date: 24/06/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

C1 - Basic Labour Relations - The LRA & BCEA

Date: 01/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Public Workshop
Venue: Johannesburg

DL19 - Protection Of Personal Information Act, POP

Date: 03/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

DL2 - Comprehensive Guide to Employment Equity

Date: 06/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

C7 - Managing day to day HR

Date: 07/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Public Workshop
Venue: Johannesburg

DL10 - Cross Examination Skills

Date: 08/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

DL12 - Retrenchments & Transfer of Business

Date: 13/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

C9 - Initiating and Chairing Disciplinary Hearings

Date: 14/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Public Workshop
Venue: Johannesburg

DL7 - Managing day to day HR

Date: 20/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Distance Learning
Venue: Office / Home

C19 - Protection Of Personal Information Act

Date: 21/07/2020 09:00:00 AM
Event Type: Public Workshop
Venue: Johannesburg

See more...
Title Description Published By
Jun 2020
Advanced leave a possible solution to the payment of salaried employees Lezanne Taylor View
May 2020/1
Apr 2020/2
COVID 19 – SMME Interventions Sashin Naaido View
Apr 2020/1
COVID-19 – Salary payments, relief payments and UIF claims during lockdown Johann Rheeder View
Mar 2020
Your obligations in a COVID-19 World State of Emergency! Gilles van de Wall View
Feb 2020
A tale of two judgments dealing with free speech and hate speech Ivor Heyman View
Jan 2020
The development of vicarious liability in Employment Law Alex Davies View
Dec 2019
The development of vicarious liability in employment law Alex Davies View
Nov 2019
Privacy implementation in South Africa – Quo vadis? Johanette Rheeder View
Oct 2019
Prescription of Labour law Wanya Cloete View
Sep 2019
Litigation Privilege: when and how can it be waived? Ivor Heyman View
Aug 2019
Refusal to accept a demand by an employer a legitimate operational requirements? Alex Davies View
July 2019
The Concept of Job Security & Fairness For Employees in Retrenchments Alex Davies View
June 2019
Can a union suspend a strike and take it up again? Johanette Rheeder View
May 2019
Social Media – Clash between Freedom of Expression & Privacy Ivor Heyman View
April 2019
Canabis in the workplace Wanya Cloete View
March 2019
GDPR/POPIA – Where Technology and Ethics have reached crossroads Megan Grindell View
February 2019
Strikes – certificates of outcome and matters of mutual interest – how far does it stretch? Johanette Rheeder View
Jan 2019
Regulations relating to the Protection of Personal Information Johanette Rheeder View
Dec 2018
Collection of debt from Employees Johanette Rheeder View
Nov 2018
Strikes – certificates of outcome and matters of mutual interest – how far does it stretch? Johanette Rheeder View
October 2018
The right to strike – A matter of mutual interest Johanette Rheeder View
July 2018
Extension of Collective Agreements Alex Davies View
June 2018
GDPR / POPIA – Where Technology & Ethics Have Reached a Crossroad Megan Grindell View
May 2018
Exemption Clauses: an assessment of the burden of proof Ivor Heyman View
April 2018
Companies that cannot afford the National Minimum Wage Department Of Labour View
March 2018
Portfolio Committee on Labour Extended Invitation for Commentary By SASLAW View
February 2018
Business Rescue Proceedings – A Brief Overview Alex Davies View
January 2018
Collection of debt from employees Alex Davies View
November 2017
Publication Of New Bills Which Impact Employment Alex Davies View
September 2017
POPI Regulations & the duties of the Information Officer Johanette Rheeder View
August 2017
Is a Break in the Trust Relationship, a prerequisite to Dismissal? Alex Davies View
July 2017
Temporary Employment Services - NUMSA vs Asign Services Alex Davies View
June 2017
Probation and probation related dismissals in the CCMA Johanette Rheeder View
May 2017
Job descriptions and extra duties required of an emplyee Johanette Rheeder View
March 2017
The extention of collective agreements in the workplace Alex Davies View
January 2017
The application of the prescription act to disputes under the labour relations act Alex Davies View
November 2016
Who can represent parties at CCMA proceedings? Yozan Botha View
September 2016
“Solidarity for Ever” Collective bargaining – rights and duties Johanette Rheeder View
July 2016
POPI Implementation on the horizon Johanette Rheeder View
May 2016
Applying the rule test in disciplinary hearing Johanette Rheeder View
April 2016
Does the managerial prerogative still apply during the recruitment process? Johanette Rheeder View
March 2016
The Stigmatising Effect of Medical Testing on Mental Illness Kellie Hennessy View
February 2016
Office Romance - A Lesson in managing personal relationships at work Kellie Hennessy View
January 2016
Rights for Males to Maternity Leave Benefits Kellie Hennessy View
December 2015
Interdicting Disciplinary Hearings Johanette Rheeder View
November 2015
The Right to Natural Justice in Disciplinary Hearings Xander Wehncke View
October 2015
The Protection of Personal Information Act No 4 of 2013 (“POPI”): Rethink the ‘architechture’ of your business Kellie Hennessy View
September 2015
Load Shedding in the Workplace: Negotiate Back the Power Kellie Hennessy View
July 2015
Retrenchment - Do We Recognise The Effect? Johanette Rheeder View
June 2015
The new CCMA rules - The ultimate relief? Johanette Rheeder View
May 2015
Medical Incapacity, Disability and Discrimination Kellie Hennessy View
April 2015
Breach of the trust relationship in employment: What to prove and how to prove it Xander Wehncke View
March 2015
The exposure of senior employees in terms of Labour Relations Amendment Act 2012 Johanette Rheeder View
February 2015
The Correct Approach to a Reviewable ‘Error in Law' Kellie Hennessy View
January 2015
E-Cigarettes and the Workplace Kellie Hennessy View