C C v Z D (10029/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 130 (29 March 2019)

C C v Z D (10029/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 130 (29 March 2019)

The court found that the respondent's allegations against the applicant were unsubstantiated, based on hearsay and vague assertions, and did not warrant restricting the applicant's rights. The judge interviewed the minor child, who expressed a strong bond and affection for the applicant, and found no indication of risk or inappropriate exposure. The respondent had previously consented to the travel and had not taken any protective steps since learning of the alleged conduct. The court concluded that the respondent's withdrawal of consent was unreasonable and that granting the applicant leave to travel with the minor child was in the child's best interests.

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 130
Parties
Applicant: C C; Respondent: Z D
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Case Number
10029/2019
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Leave to Temporarily Remove Minor Child From South Africa for Vacation
Outcome
The application for leave to travel with the minor child is granted; the order of 19 March 2019 is confirmed.
Judges
L Modiba
Legal Topics
International Travel With Minor, Parental Consent, Best Interests of Child, Urgent Interim Relief
Family and Children International Travel With Minor Parental Consent Best Interests of Child Urgent Interim Relief

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C C

Applicant

Z D

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Leave to Temporarily Remove Minor Child From South Africa for Vacation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's withdrawal or refusal of consent for the minor child's international travel is reasonable.
  2. 2 Whether granting leave for the applicant to travel with the minor child is in the child's best interests.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's allegations against the applicant were unsubstantiated, based on hearsay and vague assertions, and did not warrant restricting the applicant's rights. The judge interviewed the minor child, who expressed a strong bond and affection for the applicant, and found no indication of risk or inappropriate exposure. The respondent had previously consented to the travel and had not taken any protective steps since learning of the alleged conduct. The court concluded that the respondent's withdrawal of consent was unreasonable and that granting the applicant leave to travel with the minor child was in the child's best interests.

Court Disposition

The application for leave to travel with the minor child is granted; the order of 19 March 2019 is confirmed.

Orders

  • The order granted on 19 March 2019 is confirmed.