087 822 1639
Skip to content 087 822 1639
Many divorces can be managed without a large external expert team.
That changes when the outcome depends on technical questions outside ordinary legal analysis. A private company may need to be valued. Financial records may need reconstruction. A complex retirement interest may need specialist calculation. A proposed settlement may also need tax or corporate-law input before it can safely be implemented.
The family-law attorney remains responsible for legal strategy, procedure and the settlement process. The expert’s role is different: to answer a defined technical question that the attorney should not estimate or assume.
The starting point is not: “Which experts do we normally use?” It is: “Which technical questions must be answered before this matter can be valued, negotiated or tried properly?”
That distinction matters. Unnecessary experts add cost and delay. Missing the right expert can leave the parties negotiating on an incomplete or unreliable financial picture.
A family-law attorney is trained in matrimonial property law, evidence, procedure and settlement strategy. That does not make the attorney a business valuer, forensic accountant, actuary, tax adviser or property valuer.
Where a genuine technical question arises, the better approach is to define the question, appoint the appropriate specialist, brief that specialist properly and integrate the result into the legal strategy.
The same principle works in reverse. A technical expert should not decide the legal issue. The expert provides specialist evidence or analysis. The attorney applies that work within the correct legal framework.
A forensic accountant may be useful where the ordinary financial statements do not explain a party’s true financial position or where the underlying transactions are disputed.
Typical instructions may include:
South African cases illustrate why the underlying records can matter where business interests, loan accounts or a party’s true financial position are disputed.
In B v B (45681/13) [2014] ZAGPJHC 321, the Gauteng Local Division reviewed an arbitration award arising from alleged fraudulent non-disclosure in an accrual dispute. The underlying dispute included a materially increased shareholder loan account that had not been properly disclosed. The judgment is useful as an illustration of the significance of proper financial disclosure, but it should be understood as a High Court review of a private arbitration award.
J.E.R (Nee O) v B.E.S – Appeal (A16/2023; 15871/16) [2023] ZAWCHC 291 concerned spousal maintenance and the respondent’s means, not an accrual calculation. In assessing the financial evidence, however, the Western Cape High Court considered loan-account cessions, undervaluations and restructurings across related entities. The case illustrates why those transactions may require detailed analysis when they affect the financial picture presented to the court.
Neither case suggests that every loan-account movement is suspicious. The point is narrower: once the financial picture is genuinely disputed, the underlying records may matter more than a headline figure in the annual financial statements.
A business valuer may be required where the value of a private-company interest is material to the divorce and cannot sensibly be agreed from reliable market evidence or existing documentation.
A useful valuation should make clear:
Two competent valuers can reach different results because the outcome may depend on future earnings, discount rates, maintainable profits, marketability and the treatment of shareholder debt. A headline number without the underlying assumptions is difficult to test.
Not every property in a divorce requires a formal valuation. An ordinary residential property may sometimes be dealt with using reliable market evidence or an agreed appraisal.
Formal valuation becomes more useful where the property is substantial, unusual or central to the settlement. Examples include commercial property, farms, development land, investment portfolios and high-value residential property where the parties materially disagree about value.
The valuer may also need to distinguish between open-market value and a lower value that could result from an urgent or forced sale. Debt, leases, development rights, occupation and other encumbrances may materially affect the figure that is actually available to the estate.
Not every pension interest requires an actuary.
Sections 7(7) and 7(8) of the Divorce Act 70 of 1979 regulate the treatment of qualifying pension interests at divorce. The statutory definition differs depending on the type of retirement fund. In many conventional matters, the fund or administrator can provide the information required to formulate and implement a divorce order.
Section 37D(4) of the Pension Funds Act 24 of 1956 gives effect to the clean-break mechanism for qualifying funds. It allows an assigned portion of pension interest to be paid or transferred following divorce without requiring the non-member spouse to wait for the member’s eventual retirement or another exit event.
Actuarial input may nevertheless become valuable where the retirement arrangements are technically complex. Examples may include defined-benefit arrangements, several retirement products, disputed actuarial assumptions, unusual benefits or a need to compare the economic effect of different settlement options.
The first question should therefore be whether an actuarial calculation is genuinely necessary, rather than assuming an actuary must be appointed whenever a retirement fund appears in the estate.
Divorce settlements can have significant tax consequences, but the result depends on the asset, the parties and the structure of the transaction.
South African tax law contains important divorce-related exemptions and roll-over provisions. For example, qualifying asset transfers between spouses on divorce may receive capital-gains-tax roll-over treatment, and specific exemptions can apply to certain property transfers. Donations between spouses are also generally treated differently from ordinary taxable donations, subject to the statutory conditions.
The analysis becomes more difficult where a settlement involves companies, trusts, shareholder loans, asset disposals, restructurings or transactions that extend beyond a straightforward transfer between spouses.
SARS also publishes transaction-specific binding private rulings involving shareholder loans and restructurings. Those rulings are not universal rules. They illustrate why the actual transaction should be reviewed rather than assuming that one tax outcome applies to every loan or transfer.
Where a material tax issue genuinely arises, the tax adviser should review the proposed structure before it is finalised. Correcting an avoidable tax problem after signature can be much harder than designing the settlement properly from the outset.
A business-related settlement may also raise corporate or commercial-law issues outside family law.
Examples include:
Corporate-law input is especially important where the settlement cannot be implemented merely by agreement between the spouses because the company, other shareholders or lenders also have enforceable rights.
Share incentive schemes can create a different kind of valuation problem. A spouse may hold restricted shares, options, deferred awards or performance-linked incentives that are not equivalent to freely transferable shares.
Relevant questions may include whether the award has vested, whether it is forfeited on termination of employment, what conditions remain outstanding, when it can be exercised or sold, and how tax will apply when value is ultimately realised.
The family-law analysis may therefore need input from the employer or scheme administrator, a business valuer, a tax adviser or an employment/corporate lawyer. This is particularly important where the apparent value of the award differs materially from the amount the holder could actually realise at the relevant time.
Expert roles often intersect.
A forensic accountant’s reconstruction of a shareholder loan may change the assumptions used by the business valuer. The revised business value may affect the tax analysis. A pension or actuarial calculation may also need to be incorporated into the broader accrual or settlement model.
Where several specialists are involved, their work must ultimately be reconciled into one internally consistent financial picture. The family-law attorney should ordinarily coordinate that process while avoiding duplication of the experts’ technical functions.
Not every complex divorce needs every expert, and experts do not always need to be appointed at the same time.
A proportionate sequence may be:
The sequence will vary from matter to matter. Proportionality remains important: the cost of the expert work should bear a sensible relationship to the value in dispute and the complexity of the issue being answered.
Before instructing any specialist, ask:
A tightly defined instruction usually produces a more useful report than asking an expert to “look at everything”.
A complex settlement is only as reliable as the financial picture on which it is built.
Sound legal strategy cannot correct a business valuation that double counts debt, a loan account that has not been reconciled, a retirement interest that has been misunderstood or a settlement structure with avoidable tax consequences.
The purpose of an expert team is therefore not to make the divorce more complicated. It is to answer the technical questions that must be resolved before the legal decisions can be made properly.
Where a high-net-worth divorce involves businesses, substantial property, complex retirement interests, share incentives or other technical financial issues, early identification of the right specialists can improve the quality of the evidence and the settlement process.
Martin Vermaak Attorneys advises on complex South African divorce matters involving businesses and substantial assets.
————————————————————————————
This article provides general information about South African family-law and financial issues. It does not constitute legal, tax, accounting, actuarial or valuation advice. Whether a particular expert is required depends on the facts of the matter, the assets involved and the issues genuinely in dispute. Appropriate professional advice should be obtained before an expert is appointed or a settlement is concluded.
Author: Martin Vermaak
Legal reviewer: Michelle Soutter
Final reviewer: Martin Vermaak
Jurisdiction: South Africa
Publication status: Approved for publication
Publication date: 17 August 2026
Last legally reviewed: 14 August 2026
Review trigger: Relevant amendment to the Divorce Act, Pension Funds Act, Matrimonial Property Act or Companies Act; material change in SARS guidance affecting divorce-related transactions; or material appellate authority concerning expert evidence, valuation or pension interest in divorce.
Copyright © 2026 Martin Vermaak Attorneys. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use Privacy Policy
BannerText_Seraphinite Accelerator