The parties were married out of community of property in 1981. During the marriage the respondent husband effectively controlled an inter vivos discretionary trust (the Jubli Trust), through which substantial assets were acquired, including farms, commercial properties and shares in a company. The trust was created ostensibly for estate planning and creditor protection. The appellant wife contributed significantly to the marriage and the accumulation of wealth by maintaining the household, raising four children, assisting with farming activities, bookkeeping, and later working successfully in a business partly owned by the trust. Upon divorce, she sought a redistribution order under section 7(3) of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979, contending that the trust assets should be taken into account as they were effectively controlled by the respondent. The High Court excluded the trust assets and awarded her R400 000. She appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order directing the respondent to pay the appellant R1 250 000 within six months as a redistribution award under section 7(3) of the Divorce Act.
This case is a leading authority in South African law on when trust assets may be taken into account in divorce proceedings. It established that courts may look beyond the form of a trust to its substance, particularly where a spouse exercises de facto control over a trust and uses it as an alter ego. The judgment has had major influence on divorce, trust, and estate planning jurisprudence, curbing the abuse of trusts to evade redistribution claims.