Return to Webmag Home
Financial Planning
06 minutes

Expanding legal protection for unmarried partners

Legal protection for unmarried partners in South Africa is expanding, but recognition is not automatic. Jan du Plessis explains how recent legislative amendments, court rulings and administrative directives affect inheritance, maintenance and estate claims for permanent life partners.
Written by
Jan du Plessis
Published on
July 22, 2026
Copy link

South African law is developing, particularly regarding the recognition and protection of unmarried partners in permanent life partnerships.

In a recent amendment to the Intestate Succession Act, the word “spouse” was amended to include a partner in a permanent life partnership in which the partners have undertaken reciprocal duties of support.

In a recent amendment to the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act, the following definitions were amended: “marriage” now includes a permanent life partnership in which the partners undertook reciprocal duties of support; “spouse” now includes a person in a permanent life partnership in which the partners undertook reciprocal duties of support; and “survivor” now includes the surviving partner of a permanent life partnership terminated by the death of one partner, in which the partners undertook reciprocal duties of support, and in circumstances where the surviving partner did not received an equitable share in the deceased partner’s estate.

It should therefore be clear that a survivor in a permanent life partnership is now entitled to inherit the same benefits as a married spouse when the Intestate Succession Act is applicable, and such a survivor will also be entitled to the same maintenance as a married spouse in terms of the Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act. The challenge is proving such a permanent life partnership.

In P.A.L v R.J.T (https://www.saflii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl?file=za/cases/ZAWCHC/2026/99.html&query=pal%20near%20v%20near%20rjt), the Western Cape High Court granted interim maintenance pendente lite (temporary financial support during litigation) to an unmarried partner – a first for South Africa. The applicant, PAL, sought financial relief following the termination of a twenty‑nine‑year life partnership. Throughout their relationship, the parties cohabited, raised children, and presented themselves publicly as husband and wife, and RJT described PAL as his “lifelong partner”. RJT, the primary breadwinner, had historically supported PAL and continued to maintain her after the termination of the partnership.

The court found that PAL had established a prima facie (on the face of it) right to support, based on both RJT's express undertaking and the reciprocal duties of support inherent in their permanent life partnership. The court thus recognised that the common law must be developed to afford appropriate protection to life partners in a manner consistent with constitutional values.

In Jansen van Rensburg NO v Poole and Others (https://www.saflii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl?file=za/cases/ZAWCHC/2026/162.html&query=jansen%20near%20van%20near%20rensburg%20near%20v%20near%20poole%20near%20others), the Western Cape High Court concluded that no permanent life partnership existed between the deceased and the respondent (MPF) at the time of his death. MPF sought to be declared a permanent life partner based on cohabitation and sharing household expenses to claim rights under the Intestate Succession Act.

"The legislative definitions, court rulings, and directives quoted above confirm that legal protection for unmarried couples is expanding. However, this protection is not automatic and proving a life partnership is essen

Jan du Plessis
CEO of the Fiduciary Institute of Southern Africa (FISA)

In assessing whether a permanent life partnership existed, the court referred to Paixao v Road Accident Fund (https://www.saflii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl?file=za/cases/ZASCA/2012/130.html&query=paixao%20near%20v%20near%20road%20near%20accident%20near%20fund), where the Supreme Court of Appeal held that proving such a partnership required more than cohabitation and shared household expenses. It required credible evidence of a conjugal relationship akin to marriage, including a reciprocal duty of support, whether expressly agreed or tacitly assumed.

The court also relied on Bwanya v Master of the High Court (https://www.saflii.org/cgi-bin/disp.pl?file=za/cases/ZACC/2021/51.html&query=bwanya%20near%20v%20near%20master%20near%20of%20near%20the%20near%20high%20near%20court), where the Constitutional Court endorsed the Paixao approach. Paragraphs 55 and 56 of that judgment emphasised that permanent life partnerships are intimate, long‑term relationships intended to endure until death, often featuring reciprocal duties of support, and in many respects resembling marriages.

The court, in Jansen van Rensburg, concluded that permanent life partnerships are intimate relationships intended to continue until the death of one or both partners, and that such partnerships must, through express or tacit agreement, include reciprocal duties of support.

It should therefore be clear that a life partnership must be very similar to a marriage before our courts will recognise it as a permanent relationship.  

In terms of Chief Master’s Directive 09 of 2023 (https://www.justice.gov.za/master/m_docs/2023-09_CHM-directive.pdf), the Master of the High Court is also empowered to recognise a permanent life partnership for purposes of the Intestate Succession Act.  

When an estate is to devolve intestate and a permanent life partnership is alleged, the surviving partner must submit an affidavit which needs to prove at least the following: The length and exclusivity of the relationship; evidence of shared family responsibilities and financial interdependence; the extent to which the partners were acknowledged as life partners by friends and family; whether the partners made provision for one another in medical aid and pension funds and whether they associated in public as an intimate couple.

The South African Revenue Service (SARS) is also empowered to recognise a permanent life partnership if the Commissioner is satisfied the relationship was intended to be permanent.

Paragraph 19 of SARS’s Frequently Asked Questions on Deceased Estates (https://www.sars.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/Ops/Guides/LAPD-IT-G31-FAQs-on-Deceased-Estates.pdf) deals with a situation where unmarried partners lived together as spouses and the bequests to each other can then be claimed in terms of section 4q for Estate Duty purposes. To prove the permanent relationship, three affidavits from different parties must confirm this and a cohabitation agreement, proof of a joint bank account or a will naming the partner as a beneficiary may be required.

The legislative definitions, court rulings, and directives quoted above confirm that legal protection for unmarried couples is expanding. However, this protection is not automatic and proving a life partnership is essential.

Innovate, Elevate. Illuminate.

TIAL is a game-changing software hub for short-term insurers, administrators, underwriting managers, brokers, and agents in the Southern African Development Community.

Find out more

Dashboard mockup