The development of South African matrimonial law with specific reference to the need for and application of a domestic partnership rubric

English: In strictly adhering to the concept of marriage inherited from the Western legal tradition, pre-1994 South African family law paid scant regard to marriages other than monogamous heterosexual civil marriages, while the common law provided no express legal recognition for unmarried life or domestic partnerships. The advent of the democratic constitutional era in 1994 however spawned a flurry of legal development that broadened the notion of marriage by recognising customary marriages as well as certain consequences of marriages concluded according to the tenets of a recognised faith such as Islam. Commencing with the watershed National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality cases,' the legal position in which same-sex life partners found themselves was also dramatically improved by a number of ad hoc judicial pronouncements which extended certain consequences of marriage to such partners on the premise that they were at the time precluded from marrying one another. The flipside of this premise-namely that heterosexual life partners have always been permitted to marry one another and thus cannot request an extension of matrimonial (property) law where they have exercised a choice not to marry (the so-called "choice argument")-was, however, to constitute the major justification for the judiciary's refusal to extend similar recognition to heterosexual life partners. The application of this line of reasoning has implied that, within little more than a decade into the democratic constitutional dispensation, same-sex life partners ostensibly enjoy better legal protection and recognition of their relationships than their heterosexual counterparts. This state of affairs implies that the current legal position regarding unmarried life partners is inconsistent and fraught with anomalous legal consequences. Over and above the judicial developments, post-1994 legislation has also provided increasing recognition for unmarried life partners. However, as was the case with the judicial developments, the legislative developments were also merely piecemeal in nature. The upshot of this state of affairs is that interpersonal relationships in South Africa are governed by "a patchwork of laws that did not [and still do not] express a coherent set of family law rules." While the validation of same-sex marriages by way of the promulgation of the Civil Union Act 17 of 2006 was a salutary development from a human rights perspective, this development has created difficulties of its own. To begin with, the validation of samesex marriage implies, strictu sensu, that the "choice argument" applies equally to samesex couples who elect not to marry one another. This entails that such couples could potentially be deprived of the consortium omnis vitae that the Courts have in principle found to exist between them and that they may no longer be able to rely on the piecemeal judicial extensions granted by the Courts prior to 30 November 2006 (the day on which same-sex marriage became permissible). The legal position in this regard however remains unclear. In addition, the validation of same-sex marriage has been accomplished by way of legislation that not only requires same-sex couples to marry one another in terms of separate legislation but that also further overcomplicates the legal landscape by providing for "civil unions" that can take the form of either marriages or civil partnerships. As such, no legislation has as yet been enacted that deals with the position of life or domestic partners per se. In January 2008 a draft Domestic Partnerships Bill, 2008 saw the light of day. Using this Bill as a prototype, this study attempts-by applying a domestic partnership rubric that requires the modification of the Bill and its calibration with attendant legislation-to iron out the inconsistencies and anomalies alluded to above by providing effective domestic partnership legislation. In order to achieve this, an in-depth analysis of case law, legislation and common law is conducted with a view to establishing certain fundamental principles that ought not only to feature in the domestic partnerships legislation itself, but which are also required in order to facilitate the Bill's alignment with applicable legislation. In the light of the modified Bill, the study concludes with an evaluation of the case for retaining the Civil Union Act 17 of 2006. In the final analysis, the conclusion is reached that the enactment of the Domestic Partnerships Bill as developed in accordance with the rubric, coupled with the repeal of the Civil Union Act 17 of 2006, will provide a more consistent, coherent and less complex legal framework within which interpersonal relationships in South Africa can be regulated.