A South African High Court has ruled that a woman must forfeit her claim to her estranged husband’s pension fund, valued at approximately US$120,000, after finding that her conduct during the marriage amounted to substantial misconduct.
The judgment, delivered by Judge Noluntu Bam at the North Gauteng High Court, arose from divorce proceedings in which the husband successfully argued that his wife’s extramarital affair with one of his friends—and the subsequent birth of a child with another man—justified excluding her from sharing in his pension benefits.
The couple, who were married in community of property in 2011, had been living apart since 2020 and agreed that their marriage had irretrievably broken down. They also agreed to an equal division of their joint estate, with the exception of the pension fund, which the husband sought to ring-fence on the basis of his wife’s conduct during the marriage.
Evidence presented in court showed that the wife had been unemployed throughout the marriage and had entered into a romantic relationship with one of her husband’s friends while the couple were still cohabiting. The husband further testified that he later learned—through a Facebook baby-shower post—that his wife had given birth to a third child fathered by another man. Judge Bam described this public revelation as humiliating for the husband.
In her ruling, the judge accepted the husband’s version of events and found that allowing the wife to benefit from the pension would constitute an undue advantage, particularly in light of her new relationship and effective independence from the marital union.
Judge Bam held that the wife’s conduct, including conceiving a child with a third party and openly publicising the birth, met the threshold of “substantial misconduct” as contemplated under Section 9 of South Africa’s Divorce Act. That provision allows courts to grant forfeiture orders where, without such an order, one party would be unfairly enriched at the expense of the other.
The court granted the divorce, ordered the equal division of the joint estate excluding the pension benefits, and made appropriate arrangements for the care and maintenance of the minor children. Each party was directed to bear their own legal costs.
