DT v ST (1928/22) [2022] ZAGPJHC 176 (25 March 2022)

DT v ST (1928/22) [2022] ZAGPJHC 176 (25 March 2022)

The court found that the psychologist's report was comprehensive and addressed all relevant issues regarding the minor child's care and contact. Both parties had accepted the recommendations, and the respondent failed to provide any valid reason for further investigations, other than personal reassurance. The court held that delaying implementation of the arrangements would not serve the child's best interests, which require routine and stability. The request for an extra day of contact was found to prioritize the respondent's interests over those of the child. The court determined that the recommendations should be implemented and that the respondent should bear the costs of the...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 176
Parties
Applicant: D[....] T[....]; Respondent: S[....] E T[....] (born K[....])
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2022
Case Number
1928/22
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interlocutory (pendente Lite) Application for Care and Contact Arrangements
Outcome
Application granted. The psychologist's recommendations for care and contact are made an order of court. The respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application.
Judges
S Mahomed
Legal Topics
Care and Contact, Parenting Coordinator, Best Interests of Child, Pendente Lite Arrangements
Family and Children Care and Contact Parenting Coordinator Best Interests of Child Pendente Lite 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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D[....] T[....]

Applicant

S[....] E T[....] (born K[....])

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interlocutory (pendente Lite) Application for Care and Contact Arrangements

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the recommendations of the appointed psychologist regarding care and contact should be implemented pendente lite.
  2. 2 Whether further investigations into the minor child's circumstances are warranted.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent is entitled to an additional day of contact per month.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the psychologist's report was comprehensive and addressed all relevant issues regarding the minor child's care and contact. Both parties had accepted the recommendations, and the respondent failed to provide any valid reason for further investigations, other than personal reassurance. The court held that delaying implementation of the arrangements would not serve the child's best interests, which require routine and stability. The request for an extra day of contact was found to prioritize the respondent's interests over those of the child. The court determined that the recommendations should be implemented and that the respondent should bear the costs of the...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The psychologist's recommendations for care and contact are made an order of court. The respondent is ordered to pay the costs of the application.

Orders

  • The order marked X, incorporating the powers of a parenting coordinator marked X1, is made an order of court.
  • The respondent is to pay the party party costs of this application.