News
Johannesburg Father Risks Jail After Failing to Pay R722K Child Maintenance
Court cracks down on defaulters
A Johannesburg father is staring at 30 days in jail after failing to honour a court-ordered R722,000 child maintenance bill. The Gauteng High Court ruled him in contempt after he ignored an earlier order requiring him to pay R45,000 a month towards his three-year-old child’s care while his divorce is being finalised.
His estranged wife approached the court in desperation, arguing that she had been left without the means to provide for their child. Although the father claimed he could not afford the payments, the court was clear: until a maintenance order is formally reduced or overturned, it must be obeyed.
Excuses versus evidence
The case highlights a legal principle South African courts have repeated time and again: there is a difference between a parent who cannot pay and one who simply will not. The onus is on the defaulter to prove genuine inability, often with evidence like bank statements or partial payments as a show of good faith.
In this instance, Acting Judge F Marcandonatos found the father had failed to be transparent about his finances. His wife presented proof of luxury spending, including thousands spent on airline tickets and event passes, which he did not dispute. This weakened his claim of financial hardship.
A battle over assets
The mother previously secured a court writ to attach his Honda Civic, only for the father to argue that the car no longer belonged to him, claiming it had been sold to his mother. Such manoeuvres further strained credibility in the eyes of the court.
The father initially tried to appeal the R45,000 order but later withdrew. He then launched a new application in the Johannesburg Maintenance Court, seeking to reduce his monthly payments to R5,500. That matter is still pending, but the High Court ruled that his wife should not be left without support in the meantime.
The judge’s warning
Judge Marcandonatos noted that if individuals could pick and choose which orders to obey, constitutional protections would become meaningless. The Constitutional Court has previously underlined the same principle: compliance with court orders is not optional.
The father’s jail sentence has been suspended on condition that he pays the arrears immediately or commits to an installment plan. If he fails to do so, he risks spending a month behind bars.
Why this case matters
This ruling reflects a broader trend in South African courts: a harder line against maintenance dodgers. With many single parents already struggling financially, the judgment reinforces that the law exists to protect children first. It also underscores the importance of transparency in family disputes.
For Johannesburg parents navigating divorce and maintenance battles, this case is a stark reminder: court orders must be respected until they are formally changed. Anything less risks contempt charges, financial penalties, or even jail time.
Also read: Mitchum Deodorant Recalled in South Africa After Skin Irritation Complaints
Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter, TikT
For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com
Source: IOL
Featured Image: Burger Huyser Attorneys
