D.D.K v R.M.B.D.K & Van Aswegen NO (2022/6381) [2023] ZAGPJHC 382 (26 April 2023)

D.D.K v R.M.B.D.K & Van Aswegen NO (2022/6381) [2023] ZAGPJHC 382 (26 April 2023)

The court found no reasonable grounds to remove the second respondent as curatrix ad litem. The applicant's dissatisfaction was rooted in the curatrix's findings that S's best interests were served by spending equal time with both parents, which informed the settlement agreement. The second respondent acted within her mandate, was not shown to have acted unprofessionally or unethically, and any perceived bias was in favour of the child's best interests, as required by law. The applicant failed to cooperate with the curatrix and did not provide evidence of misconduct, incapacity, or incompetence. The court emphasized the importance of the curatrix's continued involvement, especially given...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 382
Parties
Applicant: D.D.K; Respondent: R.M.B.D.K; Respondent: Sanet Van Aswegen NO
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 April 2023
Case Number
2022/6381
Procedural Posture
Family Application / Part A: Application for Removal of Curatrix Ad Litem
Outcome
Application for discharge of the second respondent as curatrix ad litem is dismissed. The office of the family advocate is requested to investigate and report on the child's best interests. The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the first and second respondents regarding the application for postponement and...
Judges
Sarita Liebenberg
Legal Topics
Curator Ad Litem Removal, Children S Rights, Best Interests of Child, Parental Responsibilities, Child Participation, Care and Contact
Family and Children Curator Ad Litem Removal Children S Rights Best Interests of Child Parental Responsibilities Child Participation Care and Contact

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.D.K

Applicant

R.M.B.D.K

Respondent

Sanet Van Aswegen NO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Application / Part A: Application for Removal of Curatrix Ad Litem

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second respondent should be removed as curatrix ad litem for the minor child S.
  2. 2 Whether the second respondent acted unprofessionally, unethically, or with improper bias.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's dissatisfaction with the curatrix ad litem's findings justifies her removal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no reasonable grounds to remove the second respondent as curatrix ad litem. The applicant's dissatisfaction was rooted in the curatrix's findings that S's best interests were served by spending equal time with both parents, which informed the settlement agreement. The second respondent acted within her mandate, was not shown to have acted unprofessionally or unethically, and any perceived bias was in favour of the child's best interests, as required by law. The applicant failed to cooperate with the curatrix and did not provide evidence of misconduct, incapacity, or incompetence. The court emphasized the importance of the curatrix's continued involvement, especially given...

Court Disposition

Application for discharge of the second respondent as curatrix ad litem is dismissed. The office of the family advocate is requested to investigate and report on the child's best interests. The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the first and second respondents regarding the application for postponement and...

Orders

  • The application for the discharge of the second respondent as curator ad litem to S is dismissed.
  • The office of the family advocate is requested to investigate and report on S's best interests, including care, residence, contact, and proposed relocation.