Woman owes ex-spouse half her pension, says judge

A WIFE has lost a legal bid not to share half of her pension benefits with her ex-husband, who she said saw her as a “cash cow”.

She felt he had squandered most of his pension when he was paid out and thus did not deserve a share of hers.

But Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, Judge Colleen Collis did not agree. She said it appeared that the husband did pay-off some of the common household debts when he received his pension, and bought necessities such as school uniforms for the children.

Thus, the judge said, the wife had to pay the husband about R1.2m (half of her government pension) as part of the divorce settlement.

The husband, on the other hand, had used his pension earlier when he left his job and subsequently had no pension left to share with the wife.

The parties married in 2004 in community of property. There were no children born in the marriage, although the husband entered the marriage with two children born from a previous marriage. He is also the one who instituted divorce proceedings.

Apart from 50% of his former wife’s pension fund, the husband also wanted monthly spousal maintenance.

He later abandoned this request and said he would be satisfied with a divorce and half of her pension.

The wife, on the other hand, in her counter application asked for a forfeiture of half of her pension which was supposed to go to her husband as they were married in community of property.

She told the judge that her husband had resigned in 2018 and received a pension pay out in 2019 in the amount of R1.7m.

The wife said he never told her that he was going to resign from his job and, according to her, apart from giving her R3 000, he pocketed or spent the rest of the money.

She also claimed that he was financially abusive towards her and failed to contribute his fair share towards the monthly expenses of the matrimonial home.

The woman said she was a good wife, as from the start she played a motherly role to the husband’s children who she raised almost single-handedly.

She had paid for almost all their expenses and had assisted the children in paying for school fees, university fees and medical aid.

It was her testimony that the husband only married her to play the role of a mother to his children and to use her as a “cash cow”.

He, on occasion, also called her a “fat cat”, she told the court.

The wife claimed that during the marriage he never bought her anything, nor did she receive any money from him, apart from the R3 000 he gave her out of his pension payout. She said it would be unfair if he got half of her R3.6m pension.

The husband, who testified that when he left the matrimonial home he only left with his clothes, said he had invested a large chunk of his pension money and paid household debts.

He denied that he financially abused his wife.

Judge Collis referred to a previous judgment in another case in which it was said: “It has long been accepted that when parties enter into a marriage in community of property one joint estate will be formed.

“As such, entering into a marriage in community of property is a risk each spouse takes. The spouses will on the date the joint estate is created, become joint owners of all the assets brought into the estate and will also share each other’s liabilities.”

The judge said community of property was a universal economic partnership of spouses.

Judge Collis said the Divorce Act was clear that to qualify for forfeiture, based on misconduct, such misconduct must be substantial, which she could not find in this case.