The respondent was divorced from the deceased, her former husband, by a decree of divorce granted in September 1991. In terms of a court order under section 7(2) of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979, she was entitled to monthly spousal maintenance. Shortly after the divorce, the parties entered into a written agreement regulating the division of their joint estate and suspending enforcement of the maintenance order while they continued to live together. It was accepted for purposes of a stated case that, despite the divorce, they continued to cohabit and that the deceased fully maintained the respondent until his death. In October 1992 the deceased was killed in a motor vehicle collision caused by the negligent driving of an insured vehicle. Santam Bpk, as the appointed agent under the Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund Act 93 of 1989, was sued by the respondent for loss of maintenance as a dependant. The children’s claims were settled, but the respondent’s claim was disputed. The Transvaal Provincial Division upheld her claim based on the maintenance order but rejected alternative claims based on cohabitation and contract. Santam appealed against the first finding, and the respondent cross‑appealed on the alternative grounds.
The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The cross‑appeal was dismissed with costs.
This case authoritatively extended South African dependants’ action to include divorced spouses who are entitled to maintenance under a court order. It marked a significant development in the law of delict by recognising the protectable nature of statutory maintenance rights and by aligning dependants’ actions with modern policy-based reasoning in cases of pure economic loss. The judgment clarified and limited the reach of earlier obiter dicta that excluded divorced spouses from such claims.