Protection at last for black women in marriage

In terms of section 22(6) of the Black Administrations Act 38 of 1927 (BAA), all black marriages in South Africa were deemed to be out of community of property – and this default position was perpetuated by the Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984. In contrast, the default position for all other races in South African matrimonial law was, and continues to be, in community of property.

The process to approval for extending a Sectional Title Unit

This means that the protection of being married in community of property was granted to all women except black women. Fortunately, this inequality was addressed by the Marriage and Matrimonial Property Law Amendment Act 3 of 1988, which declared that all marriages concluded out of community of property under section 22(6) of the BAA would be deemed to be marriages in community of property. 

This, however, was only applicable to marriages entered into after the commencement of the 1988 amendment act – which meant that the unfair and discriminatory default position of section 22(6) of the BAA was still in place for black women who married before 1988.

In 2018, the KwaZulu-Natal High Court handed down a decision which addressed this position in its jurisdiction. The court declared that all marriages concluded out of community of property under section 22(6) of the BAA would now be deemed to be marriages in community of property. Any couples wishing to opt out of this change would need to do so by executing and registering a notarial contract to that effect.

The court’s decision brought an end to a long period of black women, particularly older black women, being denied the protection of a marriage in community of property granted to women of all other races in South Africa. This decision is in accordance with the constitution, which entrenches gender as well as racial equality. 

Want more Snymans articles? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.

Recommended for you

The difference between movable and immovable property
Legislative Guidelines

The AARTO Act: constitutional or unconstitutional?[post_view before=""]

The constitutional validity of the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (AARTO) Act and the Administrative Adjudication of Traffic Offences Amendment (AARTO Amendment) Act was recently challenged in the matter between the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA) v The Minister of Transport and others.

Read More
My name has changed - what happens to my property’s title deed?
Legislative Guidelines

Universal Partnerships: what is required?[post_view before=""]

There is currently no statute in South Africa that regulates the relationships between cohabitees if they are not formally married.

Read More
Minors and immovable property
Legislative Guidelines

CSOS and the courts: where do I take my dispute?[post_view before=""]

Here’s a look at a recent case which dealt with a dispute between the body corporate and residents in a sectional title scheme.

Read More
Your Trusted Partner in Residential and Commercial Property Transfers
Legislative Guidelines

The deal collapsed – is the attorney to blame?[post_view before=""]

The case of Nienaber N.O. and van den Berg (the plaintiffs) versus Nelson and Kitching Attorneys (the defendants) highlights the criteria of the duty of care a conveyancer should be aware of when providing services to clients. In this case, the plaintiffs instituted action alleging that the defendants owed them a duty of care as conveyancers and acted negligently and in breach of such duty. Let’s take a closer look.

Read More
Property Blog Articles | Advice | Contractual Matters | Market News
Legislative Guidelines

Court ruling: Sale of immovable property – Alienation of Land Act[post_view before=""]

In the recent case of Potgieter v Village and others, held at the High Court of South Africa, Northern Cape Division, Kimberly, the applicant applied for an urgent interdict to restrain the first and second respondents from passing transfer of a specific property. The application for the interdict was pending action by the applicant to claim transfer of the property. In this case, both parties to the contract were represented by their attorneys.

Read More

Need more Snymans content?

Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Protection at last for black women in marriage

In terms of section 22(6) of the Black Administrations Act 38 of 1927 (BAA), all black marriages in South Africa were deemed to be out of community of property – and this default position was perpetuated by the Matrimonial Property Act 88 of 1984. In contrast, the default position for all other races in South African matrimonial law was, and continues to be, in community of property.

The process to approval for extending a Sectional Title Unit

This means that the protection of being married in community of property was granted to all women except black women. Fortunately, this inequality was addressed by the Marriage and Matrimonial Property Law Amendment Act 3 of 1988, which declared that all marriages concluded out of community of property under section 22(6) of the BAA would be deemed to be marriages in community of property. 

This, however, was only applicable to marriages entered into after the commencement of the 1988 amendment act – which meant that the unfair and discriminatory default position of section 22(6) of the BAA was still in place for black women who married before 1988.

In 2018, the KwaZulu-Natal High Court handed down a decision which addressed this position in its jurisdiction. The court declared that all marriages concluded out of community of property under section 22(6) of the BAA would now be deemed to be marriages in community of property. Any couples wishing to opt out of this change would need to do so by executing and registering a notarial contract to that effect.

The court’s decision brought an end to a long period of black women, particularly older black women, being denied the protection of a marriage in community of property granted to women of all other races in South Africa. This decision is in accordance with the constitution, which entrenches gender as well as racial equality. 

Want more Snymans articles? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

Follow Snymans on Facebook for more legal information, tips and news about property.