B v B (12933/02) [2002] ZAGPHC 34 (30 October 2002)

B v B (12933/02) [2002] ZAGPHC 34 (30 October 2002)

The court found that while alternate weekend access is standard, requiring the minor child to travel between Cape Town and Johannesburg twice monthly is unreasonable given the distance and potential disruption. The applicant's right of access on alternate weekends is circumscribed so that only one weekend per month may be exercised in Johannesburg; for other weekends, the applicant may travel to Cape Town or negotiate alternative arrangements. The applicant is ordered to pay all reasonable costs associated with the child's travel for access, considering his superior financial position. The respondent is awarded costs from 2 August 2002, the date on which she tendered substantially the...

Citation
[2002] ZAGPHC 34
Parties
Applicant: B, P P; Respondent: B, S L
Court
High Courts - Gauteng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 October 2002
Case Number
12933/02
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application to Vary Custody Order
Outcome
Application to vary custody order dismissed; defined access rights granted; costs awarded to respondent from 2 August 2002, excluding supplementary affidavit costs.
Judges
Willis
Legal Topics
Custody Variation, Access Rights, Costs Order, Child Travel Arrangements
Family and Children Custody Variation Access Rights Costs Order Child Travel Arrangements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B, P P

Applicant

B, S L

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application to Vary Custody Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the existing custody order be varied to alter the rights of access of the applicant to the minor child.
  2. 2 Is it reasonable for the minor child to travel twice monthly between Cape Town and Johannesburg for access.
  3. 3 Who should bear the costs of the minor child's travel for access.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while alternate weekend access is standard, requiring the minor child to travel between Cape Town and Johannesburg twice monthly is unreasonable given the distance and potential disruption. The applicant's right of access on alternate weekends is circumscribed so that only one weekend per month may be exercised in Johannesburg; for other weekends, the applicant may travel to Cape Town or negotiate alternative arrangements. The applicant is ordered to pay all reasonable costs associated with the child's travel for access, considering his superior financial position. The respondent is awarded costs from 2 August 2002, the date on which she tendered substantially the...

Court Disposition

Application to vary custody order dismissed; defined access rights granted; costs awarded to respondent from 2 August 2002, excluding supplementary affidavit costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's rights of reasonable access to the minor child are defined as per paragraphs 1-6 of the judgment.
  • Access in Johannesburg is limited to one weekend per month, alternate Christmas/New Year, and school holidays; other access to be exercised in Cape Town unless otherwise agreed.