20 Dec Variation Of Divorce Settlement Agreement
 This appeal focuses on the question of when the Tribunal will have the right to make a settlement agreement between the parties in the divorce proceedings a court decision and when a request from the parties will have made it. The facts can be summarized as follows:- Both complainants were spouses. Their marriage was in the property community. In April 2011, the first complainant filed for divorce against the second complainant. The appeal sought in paragraph 2 of his application was that the two applicants were declared co-owners of parental responsibility for their two minor children, in accordance with section 18, paragraph 2, point a) of the Children`s Act1. The respective rights and obligations of the parties in the performance of their parenting duties were explained in detail. The application made by the first applicant in paragraph 3 also indicated that the second applicant was losing the benefits of his co-ownership marriage.  In considering Thutha`s decision, the Tribunal expressed doubts about the practice in the Ostkap courts of settlement agreements in divorce proceedings in court decisions n. In that document, the applicant sought the enforcement of an order in which a settlement agreement was reached, out of non-compliance with judicial proceedings. The divorce decree ordered that “the counting decision, which is Schedule B, be attached to this and that a court order be made here. The respondent was charged with failing to comply with the provisions of the settlement agreement.
The court was asked to despise the defendant and sentence him to a prison sentence that should be suspended until he complied with the terms of the agreement. The appeal was dismissed on the grounds that the provisions of the decision in question are not fully applicable. The court (according to Alkema J) held that a court decision “must be effective, enforceable and immediately able to be enforced by the sheriff, his deputy or members of the South African police service.” 25 In order to comply with this requirement, it was found that the order was ad factum praestandum in order to be fully applicable in a civil misunderstanding proceeding. To be able to make an order, you have to simplicity for the payment of money (ad pecuniam solvendam).