Bezuidenhout v Bezuidenhout (1954/2011) [2013] ZANWHC 13 (14 February 2013)
- Citation
- [2013] ZANWHC 13
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- North West High Court, Mafikeng
- Panel
- A A Landman
- Case number
- 1954/2011
More details
- Court
- North West High Court, Mafikeng
- Panel
- A A Landman
- Case number
- 1954/2011
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that both parties should be granted parental rights and responsibilities, with the primary residence of the minor children awarded to the applicant. The respondent retains reasonable contact rights, including visitation every last weekend of the month. The respondent is ordered to continue paying R2,000 per month in maintenance and to keep the applicant and minor children registered on his medical aid. Neither party is in a financial position to contribute to the other's costs, and certain prayers from both parties are dismissed. Costs will be costs in the cause.
Court disposition
Application granted in part; parental rights and responsibilities allocated; maintenance and medical aid orders issued; certain prayers dismissed; costs in the cause.
Orders
- Both applicant and respondent are granted parental rights and responsibilities; the minor children's primary residence is with the applicant.
- The respondent is granted reasonable contact rights with the minor children, including visitation every last weekend of the month.
- The respondent is ordered to continue paying R2,000 per month to the applicant as maintenance.
- The respondent is ordered to keep the applicant and minor children registered on his medical aid.
- Prayers 5 and 6 of the applicant and prayers 21.5 and 21.6 of the respondent are dismissed.
- Costs will be costs in the cause.
02
Material facts
Parties
Lazelle Bezuidenhout
Applicant Counsel: Adv G MareePieter Christiaan Bezuidenhout
Respondent Counsel: Adv P SmitAmounts and remedies
- Applicant's Monthly Gross Income: ZAR 42,208
- Applicant's Monthly Deductions: ZAR 38,042
- Applicant's Net Monthly Salary: ZAR 4,166
- Applicant's Monthly Expenses: ZAR 23,790
- Reduction in Applicant's Expenses Due to Employer Deductions: ZAR 11,761
- Applicant's Monthly Shortfall: ZAR 7,863
- Respondent's Net Monthly Income: ZAR 10,369
- Respondent's Monthly Expenses: ZAR 10,488
- Monthly Maintenance Payable by Respondent: ZAR 2,000
03
Procedural history
Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether both parents should be granted parental rights and responsibilities.
- 02
Determination of the primary residence of the minor children.
- 03
Assessment of the respondent's contact rights with the minor children.
- 04
Determination of the maintenance amount payable by the respondent.
- 05
Responsibility for medical aid coverage for the applicant and minor children.
- 06
Allocation of costs in the proceedings.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that she should be granted primary residence of the minor children and that the respondent should continue paying maintenance and keep the children on his medical aid. She provided detailed monthly expenses and asserted that her financial position does not allow her to contribute to the respondent's costs.
- Respondent
- The respondent contended that he should retain contact rights with the minor children and that his financial circumstances, including his monthly income and expenses, do not permit him to contribute to the applicant's costs. He agreed to continue paying maintenance and maintaining medical aid coverage.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Children's Act 38 of 2005
Parental rights and responsibilities must be allocated in the best interests of the minor children, ensuring their welfare and stability.
- 02
Maintenance Act 99 of 1998
Maintenance obligations are determined by the needs of the children and the financial means of the parties.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that both parties should be granted parental rights and responsibilities, with the primary residence of the minor children awarded to the applicant. The respondent retains reasonable contact rights, including visitation every last weekend of the month. The respondent is ordered to continue paying R2,000 per month in maintenance and to keep the applicant and minor children registered on his medical aid. Neither party is in a financial position to contribute to the other's costs, and certain prayers from both parties are dismissed. Costs will be costs in the cause.
Obiter and limits
- The financial circumstances of both parties were carefully considered, and neither is able to contribute to the other's legal costs.
- The arrangement of contact rights aims to promote the welfare of the minor children and maintain their relationship with both parents.
Court disposition
Application granted in part; parental rights and responsibilities allocated; maintenance and medical aid orders issued; certain prayers dismissed; costs in the cause.
- Both applicant and respondent are granted parental rights and responsibilities; the minor children's primary residence is with the applicant.
- The respondent is granted reasonable contact rights with the minor children, including visitation every last weekend of the month.
- The respondent is ordered to continue paying R2,000 per month to the applicant as maintenance.
- The respondent is ordered to keep the applicant and minor children registered on his medical aid.
- Prayers 5 and 6 of the applicant and prayers 21.5 and 21.6 of the respondent are dismissed.
- Costs will be costs in the cause.
Source and reliance status
North West High Court, Mafikeng
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Judgment
IN DIE NOORDWES
HOOGGEREGSHOF
(MAFIKENG)
SAAK NR. : 1954/2011
In die saak tussen:
LAZELLE
BEZUIDENHOUT .......................................................APPLIKANT
en
PIETER CHRISTIAAN BEZUIDENHOUT ............................RESPONDENT
_______________
UITSPRAAK
________________
LANDMAN R:
[1] Die applikante verdien R42 208 per maand. Die aftrekkings wat haar werkgewer maak beloop R38 042. Dit laat haar met ‘n netto salaries van R4 166 per maand.
[2] Die applikante se maandelikse uitgawes, wat sy uiteengesit het, beloop R23 790.
[3] Die applikante se maandelikse huurgeld, selfoon, water en ligte, voertuig afbetalings is deur haar werkgewer afgetrek.
[4] Dit beteken dat haar uitgawes met R11 761 verminder moet word. Haar te kort beloop dus R7 863.
[5] Die respondent verdien R10 369 netto. Dit skyn dat hy ook van tyd tot tyd ander bedrae bv betaling vir oortyd gewerk, verdien. Sy uitgawes beloop R10 488 insluitend R2 000 per maand wat hy ten opsigte van onderhoud van die kinders betaal. Nie een van die partye kan bekostig om ‘n bydrae tot die ander party se koste te kan maak nie.
[6] Derhalwe word die volgende bevel verleen:
1. Ouerlike regte en verantwoordelikhede word aan beide die applikante en die respondent toegestaan en die kinders se primêre woning word by die applikante geplaas.
2. Die respondent het die reg van kontak tot die minderjarige kinders te alle redelike tye met besoek regte elke laaste naweek van die maand.
3. Die respondent word gelas om voort te gaan om die maandelikse bedrag van R2 000.00 aan die applikante te betaal.
4. Die respondent word gelas om voort te gaan om die applikante en die minderjarige kinders op sy mediese fonds geregistreer te hou.
5. Bedes 5 en 6 van die applikante se bedes en bedes 21.5 en 21.6 van die respondent se bedes word van die hand gewys.
6. Die koste sal koste in die geding wees.
A A LANDMAN
REGTER VAN DIE
HOOGGEREGSHOF
VERSKYNINGS:
datum van verhoor : 7 Februarie 2013
datum van uitspraak : 14 februarie 2013
vir die applikante : adv g maree
vir die respondent : adv p smit
prokureur vir applikante : nienaber & wissing
prokureur vir respondent : herman scholtz prokureur
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.