71-year-old man charged in court over alleged sexual assault at George Town shopping mall

The Western Cape High Court in Cape Town has rejected a request from a woman seeking R1 million from her estranged husband to furnish temporary accommodation while their marital home is renovated. The woman also sought permission to remove items from their home to furnish an alternative property she had secured. Judge Daniel Mafaleu Thulare dismissed her application after determining the issue of alternative accommodation had already been addressed in earlier court proceedings.

The couple is going through a contentious divorce. The matrimonial home in Constantia, Cape Town, is owned by a trust. Earlier, the woman was ordered to temporarily vacate the property for renovations. She found a four-month rental from September 2026 to January 2027 but it was unfurnished. Securing furnished accommodation proved challenging due to peak summer season and high hourly rates.

Rental agencies like Dogon, Seeff, Pam Golding, Hunt Property, Sotheby’s, Steenberg Rentals and Tyson were contacted, but options were either unfurnished, didn't allow pets, or weren't available for short-term leases. Some furnished properties were offered at high daily holiday rates. The woman argued moving existing furniture would be cheaper than storage costs and she couldn't afford new furniture.

However, the trustees owning the matrimonial home refused her request, allowing her to take only personal belongings. They argued her claim was against her husband, not the trust, based on his support obligation. The earlier order requiring the husband to contribute R140,000 for alternative accommodation between February and July 2026 was upheld.

The woman's appeal failed and her husband claimed he was renting furnished accommodation at R100,000 a month. The judge applied the "once and for all" rule, stating the earlier proceedings had already dealt with the accommodation issue and the parties had considered furnished short-term accommodation.