Douglas-Hamilton v Latief (14622/2007) [2010] ZAWCHC 194 (26 August 2010)

Douglas-Hamilton v Latief (14622/2007) [2010] ZAWCHC 194 (26 August 2010)

The court found that the parties had reached agreement on all aspects of the consent paper except for the clause relating to facilitator costs. After hearing both parties and considering their respective financial positions, the court approved the variation to clause 9.18, providing for an 80/20 split of facilitator costs until the respondent obtains gainful employment, after which the split reverts to 50/50. The facilitator retains discretion to order reimbursement of costs where appropriate. The variation was found to be fair and in the best interests of the child.

Citation
[2010] ZAWCHC 194
Parties
Applicant: John Gavin Douglas-Hamilton; Respondent: Wisaal Latief
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 August 2010
Case Number
14622/2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Variation of Consent Order
Outcome
The consent paper is varied in accordance with the applicant's notice of motion and the parties' agreement, with the revised clause 9.18 regarding facilitator costs incorporated. No order as to costs.
Judges
Steyn
Legal Topics
Variation of Consent Order, Child Care and Contact, Facilitation Costs
Family and Children Variation of Consent Order Child Care and Contact Facilitation Costs

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Gavin Douglas-Hamilton

Applicant

Wisaal Latief

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Variation of Consent Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the consent paper regarding care and contact of the minor child should be varied as per the applicant's notice of motion.
  2. 2 How the costs of the facilitator should be apportioned between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the parties had reached agreement on all aspects of the consent paper except for the clause relating to facilitator costs. After hearing both parties and considering their respective financial positions, the court approved the variation to clause 9.18, providing for an 80/20 split of facilitator costs until the respondent obtains gainful employment, after which the split reverts to 50/50. The facilitator retains discretion to order reimbursement of costs where appropriate. The variation was found to be fair and in the best interests of the child.

Court Disposition

The consent paper is varied in accordance with the applicant's notice of motion and the parties' agreement, with the revised clause 9.18 regarding facilitator costs incorporated. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The consent paper entered into between the parties on 9 February 2009 and made an order of court on 13 February 2009 is varied as per the applicant's notice of motion and amendments agreed between the parties.
  • Clause 9.18 of the consent paper is amended to provide for an 80/20 split of facilitator costs until the respondent obtains gainful employment, thereafter reverting to a 50/50 split, with the facilitator retaining discretion to order reimbursement of costs.