D.W.A v C.A - Rule 43 Application (1126/2022) [2023] ZAECQBHC 53 (26 September 2023)

D.W.A v C.A - Rule 43 Application (1126/2022) [2023] ZAECQBHC 53 (26 September 2023)

The court found that the acrimonious relationship between the parties was causing emotional harm to the minor children, necessitating professional intervention. Both parties acknowledged the children's distress, and the Family Advocate recommended the appointment of a psychologist and a parenting coordinator. The respondent's objections did not outweigh the need for immediate assistance to the children. The court held that a psychologist should be appointed to provide therapy and assessment, and a mediator should be appointed with the power to issue binding directives regarding contact and related matters. The respondent was not compelled to undergo psychological evaluation, as such...

Citation
[2023] ZAECQBHC 53
Parties
Applicant: D.W.A; Respondent: C.A
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 September 2023
Case Number
1126/2022
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Rule 43 Application; Interlocutory Relief Pending Divorce Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted in part; psychologist and mediator appointed; costs in the cause.
Judges
M Makaula
Legal Topics
Parenting Coordination, Psychological Assessment, Best Interests of Child, Rule 43 Procedure
Family and Children Parenting Coordination Psychological Assessment Best Interests of Child Rule 43 Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.W.A

Applicant

C.A

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Rule 43 Application; Interlocutory Relief Pending Divorce Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a psychologist should be appointed to assist the minor children in processing the effects of the divorce.
  2. 2 Whether a parenting coordinator should be appointed to mediate disputes between the parties regarding contact and related issues.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be compelled to undergo psychological evaluation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the acrimonious relationship between the parties was causing emotional harm to the minor children, necessitating professional intervention. Both parties acknowledged the children's distress, and the Family Advocate recommended the appointment of a psychologist and a parenting coordinator. The respondent's objections did not outweigh the need for immediate assistance to the children. The court held that a psychologist should be appointed to provide therapy and assessment, and a mediator should be appointed with the power to issue binding directives regarding contact and related matters. The respondent was not compelled to undergo psychological evaluation, as such...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; psychologist and mediator appointed; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • Ms. Kaitlin Yendall, a counselling psychologist, is appointed to assist the minor children with understanding and processing their life experiences and changes in their family system.
  • The psychologist may engage with the applicant and respondent when necessary, but findings are confidential and parties are not entitled to feedback.