THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 20808/2014 In the matter between: ANDREW CHARLES BROOKSTEIN APPELLANT and JEANETTE BROOKSTEIN RESPONDENT Neutral citation: (20808/14) [2016] ZASCA 40 (24 Brookstein v Brookstein March 2016) Coram: Maya AP, Swain JA and Tsoka, Baartman and Kathree-Setiloane AJJA Heard: 26 February 2016 Delivered: 24 March 2016 Summary: Arbitration Act 42 of 1965 interpretation of – ‘matrimonial cause or matter of the Act court order incorporating incidental to such cause’ in s 2 – settlement agreement disposed of all matrimonial issues and its natural consequences deliberate non-disclosure of true value of accrual delictual claim – – susceptible to arbitration Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 date for – – determination of value of accrual date of dissolution appropriate date, not litis – contestatio.
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Reportable Case No: 20808/2014 In the matter between: ANDREW CHARLES BROOKSTEIN APPELLANT and JEANETTE BROOKSTEIN RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Brookstein v Brookstein (20808/14) [2016] ZASCA 40 (24 March 2016) Coram: Maya AP, Swain JA and Tsoka, Baartman and Kathree-Setiloane AJJA Heard: 26 February 2016 Delivered: 24 March 2016 Summary: Arbitration Act 42 of 1965 – interpretation of ‘matrimonial cause or matter incidental to such cause’ in s 2 of the Act – court order incorporating settlement agreement disposed of all matrimonial issues and its natural consequences – deliberate non-disclosure of true value of accrual – delictual claim susceptible to arbitration – Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984 – date for determination of value of accrual – date of dissolution appropriate date, not litis contestatio.
2478_Brookstein%20v%20Brookstein%20(Final)%2024%20March%202016.docx