whether Mrs Q will be entitled to claim the property as stipulated in the ante-nuptial agreement. The parties had been married and divorced twice before. Both of these divorces were the

Question

result of Mr Q having extramarital affairs. Mr and Mrs Q were married again (i.e. for the third
time) in 2000 and divorced in 2010. The antenuptial contract entered into before the final
marriage in 2000 provided that if Mr Q was the cause of a divorce due to an extramarital affair,
he would have to provide Mrs Q with a fixed property to the value of R 200 000 (with an
escalation value of 12% per annum from the date of the marriage) within three months after
the divorce. During the third marriage, Mr Q indeed had an extramarital affair with Mrs Y.
During the divorce proceedings in 2010, Mrs Q attempted to rely on the clause of the
antenuptial contract and claimed the property to which she believed she was entitled. Mr Q
argued that the clause was not enforceable. He argued that the clause was contra bonos
mores because it encouraged the dissolution of the marriage.

Answer 1

The issue at hand is whether the clause in the antenuptial agreement, which provides for the payment of a fixed property to Mrs Q in the event of divorce due to Mr Q's extramarital affair, is enforceable.

Mr Q argues that the clause is contra bonos mores, which means that it goes against public policy because it encourages the dissolution of the marriage. However, this argument is unlikely to succeed as the clause is a private agreement between two individuals and does not have any impact on the public policy of the state.

In addition, the court has previously held that antenuptial agreements that provide for the payment of maintenance or a lump sum payment in the event of divorce due to infidelity are enforceable, as long as they are not against public policy. Therefore, the court is likely to uphold the clause in this case.

Assuming the clause is enforceable, Mrs Q is entitled to claim the fixed property to the value of R 200 000 (with an escalation value of 12% per annum from the date of the marriage) within three months after the divorce. It should be noted that the property must be of equal value to the specified amount at the time of payment, taking the escalation value into account.

Overall, it seems that Mrs Q has a strong argument for claiming the property as stipulated in the antenuptial agreement. However, the final decision will depend on the specific wording of the clause and any other relevant factors that may be considered by the court.