Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
29 February 2024 | Story VALENTINO NDABA | Photo Stephen Collett
Prof Bradley
Prof Bradley Smith tackles the ambiguities surrounding trust misuse during divorce proceedings.

In his inaugural lecture on 21 February 2024 at the University of the Free State (UFS), Prof Bradley Smith explored the complexities of trust misuse in the context of property disputes during divorce proceedings. Prof Smith is an Extraordinary Professor at the UFS Faculty of Law. Drawing on two decades of judicial evolution in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), Prof Smith highlighted the inconsistencies in the SCA’s treatment of this issue that impedes attempts to curb “divorce planning” by way of a trust and proposed solutions to address them.

One of the core issues he identified is the abuse of trusts, where assets are placed within a family trust to diminish a spouse’s personal estate value while treating the trust property as personal property for personal gain. This is often done in an attempt to evade the financial consequences of divorce. Prof Smith explained that this practice undermines the essence of trust law and that the inconsistent approaches by our courts exacerbate the challenges in dividing property during divorce proceedings in a manner that respects the spouses’ matrimonial property regime.

Navigating challenges: reflections on research and its importance

Prof Smith’s proposal revolves around the development of a consolidated test for piercing the veneer of an abused trust, aiming to enhance legal certainty. He emphasised the necessity of a unified approach. “Utilising this test will ensure uniformity because of its applicability to all marriages out of community of property, irrespective of whether the accrual system is involved,” he said.

His meticulous examination of conflicting judgments was praised by Dr Brand Claassen, head of the Department of Private Law, who described it as “the work of a master craftsman”. Retired Judge of Appeal, Eric Leach, also highlighted its critical importance in clarifying complex legal issues for the public good.

“It is of critical importance and in the public interest for judicial decisions, particularly those of higher courts such as the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court, to be subjected to careful and considered analysis and, if needs be, criticism. Prof Smith’s inaugural lecture on combating trust form abuse in the context of matrimonial property claims at divorce, in which he carefully considered and analysed the conflict between several Supreme Court of Appeal judgments, was a valuable and important study on the issue,” said Judge Leach. He added that he hoped Prof Smith’s research would be considered by the SCA in future.

Future directions: advancing discourse and sound legal theory

Looking ahead, Prof Smith envisions further research into the applicability of the consolidated test to marriages in community of property, aiming to address remaining uncertainties that lie at the intersection of matrimonial property and trust law. He emphasised the importance of countering the prevailing “catch-me-if-you-can” attitude in divorce matters, advocating for proactive measures to uphold fairness and justice in matrimonial property disputes.

In conclusion, Prof Smith’s inaugural lecture provided valuable insights into combating trust form abuse within the context of matrimonial property claims at divorce. His proposed solutions and ongoing research efforts signify a commitment to advancing discourse on trust law theory and practice, with the ultimate aim of a sound judicial approach that serves the needs of South African society.

News Archive

Q and A with Prof Hussein Solomon on ‘Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism in Africa’
2015-05-29

 

Political Science lecturer, Prof Hussein Solomon, has launched his latest book, Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism in Africa: fighting insurgency from Al Shabaab, Ansar Dine and Boko Haram, on Wednesday 26 May 2015 at the UFS.

In his book, Solomon talks about the growing terrorist threat in Africa, with the likes of Al Shabaab, Ansar Dine, and Boko Haram exploiting Africa's vulnerabilities to expand their operations. Explaining both the limitations of current counter-terrorist strategies and possible future improvements, this timely study can be appreciated by scholars and practitioners alike.

Q: If you speak of Al Shabaab, Ansar Dine, and Boko Haram expanding operations, do you see possibilities for their expansion even into South Africa, or is expansion mainly focused on northern African countries?
 
A: All three movements are operating out of their respective countries. Al Shabaab has attacked Kenya and Uganda and tried to attack the 2010 Soccer World Cup in South Africa. So yes, there is a danger that they are here and, more importantly, newer groups like ISIS are recruiting in SA already.
 
Q: If the traditional military response is ineffective, what would be a better approach then?

 
A:
What is important is that the force of arms needs to complement the force of ideas. What is being waged is an ideological battle, and, just as the West defeated Communism ideologically in the Cold War, we need to defeat radical Islamism ideologically. In addition, the military response needs to complement the governance and development responses.
 
Q: External players like the US have insufficient knowledge of the context, what would be the knowledge about context necessary for anyone concerned about the terror problem in Africa?
 
A: Allow me to give you some examples. The US trains African militaries to fight terrorist groups, but, when they return to their countries, they stage a coup and topple the civilian government. The US does not seem to understand that arming a predatory military and training them makes them more predatory and brutal, which results in civilians being recruited by terrorists, as happened in Mali. Similarly, the US sent arms to the Somali government, and members of that government sold those arms to Al Shabaab terrorists, the very people they were supposed to fight. So the Americans do not understand the criminalisation of the African state, which undermines good governance and promotes terrorism.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept