Child maintenance is a critical solution in law, it allows for
the most basic care for the most helpless in society, our children.
Recently, our courts have been called upon to decide how important
a debt created by a child maintenance order is, after it
hasn't been paid consistently.
In Simon Roy Arcus v Jill Henree Arcus
(4/2021) [2022] ZASCA 9 (21 January 2022) the essential issue
decided by the court was whether a maintenance order is a judgment
debt, subject to 30 years' prescription period, or whether it
is subject to the ordinary three years' prescription period,
in terms of sections 11(a) and (d) of The Precription Act 68 of
1969, as amended, respectively.
In the above case regarding the Arcus family, Mr and Mrs Arcus
were divorced and settled on a maintenance order in 1993 that
became an order of court. Mr Arcus committed to paying maintenance
for the couple's two minor daughters until they became
self-supporting, eventually occurring in 2002 and 2005.
