{"id":47685,"date":"2026-09-22T10:25:45","date_gmt":"2026-09-22T08:25:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/stbb.co.za\/dev2\/?p=47685"},"modified":"2026-09-22T10:26:01","modified_gmt":"2026-09-22T08:26:01","slug":"surviving-spouse-maintenance-claim-override-property-inheritance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stbb.co.za\/dev2\/surviving-spouse-maintenance-claim-override-property-inheritance\/","title":{"rendered":"Pulse | Can a surviving spouse\u2019s maintenance claim override a property inheritance?"},"content":{"rendered":"

In De Bruyn v The Master of the High Court<\/em><\/u><\/a>, the Supreme Court of Appeal (\u2018the SCA\u2019) recently upheld the Master\u2019s refusal to prohibit a surviving spouse\u2019s maintenance claim which effectively exhausted the estate available for distribution. Although the deceased had bequeathed immovable property to his daughter, subject to a lifelong usufruct in favour of his wife, the liquidation and distribution account allocated the property to the wife in settlement of her maintenance claim.<\/p>\n

The facts of the case<\/strong><\/p>\n

The deceased passed away on 29th<\/sup> January 2015. He had been married to the respondent, who was nominated and appointed as executrix of his estate, for 26 years.<\/p>\n

Under the deceased\u2019s will, the immovable property was bequeathed to his daughter from a previous marriage \u2013 the appellant \u2013 while his wife was granted a lifelong usufruct over it. At the time of the deceased\u2019s death, the respondent was 70 years old, had been financially supported by him throughout their marriage, and her maintenance was provided for in his will<\/u><\/a>.<\/p>\n

As surviving spouse, the respondent lodged a maintenance claim against the estate under the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act. On assessment, the actuarially calculated claim exceeded the estate\u2019s available value. The L&D account was consequently structured so that the maintenance claim absorbed the amount otherwise available for distribution, while avoiding insolvency of the estate. Accordingly, it allocated the immovable property to the respondent in her personal capacity in settlement of the claim.<\/p>\n

The appellant objected to the maintenance claim following which the Master of the High Court required a supplementary actuarial calculation that took the respondent\u2019s life policies into account. After considering the amended L&D account and revised actuarial report, the Master was satisfied that the claim complied with the Act and dismissed the objection.<\/p>\n

The appellant unsuccessfully challenged that decision in the High Court before appealing to the SCA. By the time the matter reached the SCA, she no longer contended that the respondent had no maintenance claim at all. Instead, the dispute had narrowed to the amount of the claim.<\/p>\n

When may a surviving spouse claim maintenance?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Section 2(1) of the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act provides a surviving spouse<\/u><\/a> with a claim against the deceased spouse\u2019s estate for reasonable maintenance needs until death or remarriage, but only insofar as the survivor cannot provide for those needs from their own means and earnings. Under the law, \u2018own means\u2019 is defined to include money, property, or other financial benefits accruing to the survivor through matrimonial property law, succession, or otherwise upon the deceased\u2019s death.<\/p>\n

A maintenance claim is therefore not automatic merely because the parties were married. Relying on Friedrich v Smit NO<\/em>, the SCA confirmed that the survivor must establish a genuine need for reasonable maintenance and an inability to adequately maintain themselves. To that end, extravagant demands fall outside statutory protection.<\/p>\n

Section 3 of the Act requires the following factors, together with any other relevant considerations, to be taken into account:<\/p>\n