Download PDF

South Africa Judgment

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

E.B.S v S.P (2024/119436) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1173 (1 November 2024)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that, despite the lack of proper service, both parties were present and willing to engage. The Respondent did not dispute the Applicant's allegations but justified her conduct based on concern for the children. The court, acting as upper guardian, determined that the breakdown in communication and lack of a parenting plan necessitated judicial intervention. Rather than postponing or removing the matter from the roll, the court prioritized the best interests of the minor children by instituting interim contact arrangements and mandating the involvement of a family service provider. The order was intentionally limited to short-term arrangements, with the expectation that the parties would develop a comprehensive parenting plan with professional assistance. Costs were to be shared equally, and both parties were cautioned regarding the consequences of non-compliance.

Court disposition

Interim contact arrangements granted; parties ordered to attend co-parenting and conflict resolution sessions; costs to be shared equally.

Orders

  • For the next 4 weeks, visits between the Applicant and minor children will occur every Wednesday afternoon from 15h00 to 17h00 at the Respondent's residence and every Saturday from 10h00 to 14h00 at the Applicant's residence.
  • The Respondent will transport the minor children to the Applicant's residence for visits.
  • Family Reconnect will facilitate handovers and provide parental guidance, co-parenting classes, and conflict resolution.
  • Both parties must attend an intake session with Family Reconnect on 4 November 2024.
  • After 4 weeks, subject to Family Reconnect's satisfaction, visits will occur every Wednesday afternoon from 14h30 to 16h30 (Applicant to pick up from school and drop off at Respondent's home) and every alternate weekend from Friday 14h30 to Sunday 16h30.
  • During Applicant's contact, Respondent may call via video at 9h00 on Saturday and Sunday and send voice notes at 18h00 on Friday and Saturday; Applicant must play voice notes to children as part of bedtime routine.
  • Family Reconnect to draft a parenting plan when parties are ready and assist with December holiday arrangements.
  • Costs of Family Reconnect to be shared equally.
  • Parties are cautioned regarding Section 35 of the Children’s Act and consequences of non-compliance.

02

Material facts

Parties

E[...] B[...] S[...]

Applicant Counsel: Mr. P. Zwane

S[...] P[...]

Respondent Counsel: Ms. S. Pasiya

Amounts and remedies

  • Costs Shared Equally: ZAR 50

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Urgent Application / Hearing and Final Order

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Applicant contended that the Respondent was in contempt of the previous court order by refusing him contact with their two minor daughters, aged 2 and 3. He argued that the Respondent's actions were unjustified and detrimental to the children's welfare. The Applicant sought enforcement of contact rights and the intervention of the court to facilitate co-parenting and compliance with the existing order.
Respondent
The Respondent admitted to withholding contact but justified her actions as being motivated by concern for the children's health and wellbeing. She did not deny failing to attend the meeting with the Family Advocate. The Respondent expressed willingness to reinstate contact and requested an opportunity to appoint legal representation, but was open to the court's guidance and the establishment of a structured process.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 7(1)(n) of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005

    The best interests of the child are paramount in all matters concerning children.

  2. 02

    Section 35 of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005

    Non-compliance with a court order regulating parental rights and responsibilities may have serious consequences.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that, despite the lack of proper service, both parties were present and willing to engage. The Respondent did not dispute the Applicant's allegations but justified her conduct based on concern for the children. The court, acting as upper guardian, determined that the breakdown in communication and lack of a parenting plan necessitated judicial intervention. Rather than postponing or removing the matter from the roll, the court prioritized the best interests of the minor children by instituting interim contact arrangements and mandating the involvement of a family service provider. The order was intentionally limited to short-term arrangements, with the expectation that the parties would develop a comprehensive parenting plan with professional assistance. Costs were to be shared equally, and both parties were cautioned regarding the consequences of non-compliance.

Obiter and limits

  • The court observed that both parents love their children and want what is best for them.
  • The process aims to keep the children out of the court system by fostering effective co-parenting.
  • The involvement of Family Reconnect is intended to equip the parties with skills for conflict resolution and co-parenting.

Court disposition

Interim contact arrangements granted; parties ordered to attend co-parenting and conflict resolution sessions; costs to be shared equally.

  • For the next 4 weeks, visits between the Applicant and minor children will occur every Wednesday afternoon from 15h00 to 17h00 at the Respondent's residence and every Saturday from 10h00 to 14h00 at the Applicant's residence.
  • The Respondent will transport the minor children to the Applicant's residence for visits.
  • Family Reconnect will facilitate handovers and provide parental guidance, co-parenting classes, and conflict resolution.
  • Both parties must attend an intake session with Family Reconnect on 4 November 2024.
  • After 4 weeks, subject to Family Reconnect's satisfaction, visits will occur every Wednesday afternoon from 14h30 to 16h30 (Applicant to pick up from school and drop off at Respondent's home) and every alternate weekend from Friday 14h30 to Sunday 16h30.
  • During Applicant's contact, Respondent may call via video at 9h00 on Saturday and Sunday and send voice notes at 18h00 on Friday and Saturday; Applicant must play voice notes to children as part of bedtime routine.
  • Family Reconnect to draft a parenting plan when parties are ready and assist with December holiday arrangements.
  • Costs of Family Reconnect to be shared equally.
  • Parties are cautioned regarding Section 35 of the Children’s Act and consequences of non-compliance.

Source and reliance status

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Judgment

[2024] ZAGPJHC 1173

SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy

REPUBLIC

OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF

SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

Case Number: 2024-119436

(1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO

(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO

(3) REVISED: YES/NO

In the matter between:

E[…] B[…] S[…] Applicant and S[…] P[…] Respondent

JUDGMENT

Nieuwoudt, AJ

[1] This matter came before me as an urgent application in which the Applicant is requesting that the Respondent be found in contempt of a court order dated 19 April 2024. The Applicant is alleging that the Respondent is refusing the Applicant to the two minor daughters ages 2 years old and 3 years old. An allegation that the Respondent did not deny but stated that she did that out of concern for her children’s health and wellbeing. The Respondent also did not deny that she did not attend the meeting with the Family Advocate.

[2] Although there was not proper service of the application on the Respondent, she however attended the proceedings. She received an email from the Applicant’s attorney the night before the hearing of the matter and took it upon herself to appear. She did indicate that she would like the opportunity to appoint an attorney to assist her, but she was also willing to reinstate the contact.

[3] After listening to the Respondent and hearing her concerns I decided to deal with the matter as upper guardian of the minor children. The Applicant was in court together with his representative Mr Zwane. I asked him to join his attorney and the Respondent in front of the court and proceeded to give each of them an opportunity to address the Court on what they deem the problem to be with their relationship and their co-parenting. It was clear from the conversation that the Court had with them that: –

3.1 There was a breakdown of communication between them.

3.2 And a lack of co-parenting between them.

3.3 In the absence of a proper parenting plan there was no mechanism in place to deal with any disputes between them.

[4] I could have postponed the matter or removed the matter from the roll but taking into consideration Section 7(1)(n) of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005, the Court was of the opinion that it would be in the best interest of the minor children that a process is started and some guidelines are put in place to put these parents on the right track to hopefully be effective co-parents for these two very young children and through that keep these two young and vulnerable children out of the court system.

[5] I prepared a draft order which I shared with the parties and on 31 October 2024 at 11h30 the matter was called virtually to give both parties an opportunity to give their input into my proposed plan of action. The order that will be made intentionally does not deal with any long-term arrangements with the hope that the parties will use the parenting plan to deal with the finer details of co-parenting and contact arrangements.

[6] Taking into consideration the input from the parties and the submissions heard during the hearing of the matter on 30 and 31 October 2024 I make the following order:

1. For the 4 weeks following the granting of this order visits between the Applicant/Biological Father and the minor children will take place as follows:

a. Every Wednesday afternoon from 15h00 to 17h00 at the residence of the Respondent/Biological Mother.

b. Every Saturday from 10h00 to 14h00 at the residence of the Applicant/Biological Father.

c. The Respondent will transport the minor children to the residence of the Applicant/Biological Father for their visits with him.

2. Family Reconnect [email: a[…]] will be present at the handovers of the minor children between the parties to facilitate the handovers and to ensure that the parents [Applicant and Respondent] have the necessary skills to ensure that the handovers going forward take place in the best interest of the minor children.

3. The parties are to attend an intake session with Family Reconnect on 4 November 2024 and should on receipt of this order contact them at the email address provided to confirm the time of the intake session.

4. After the initial four weeks and subject to Family Reconnect being satisfied that this initial phase can be concluded visits between the Applicant and the minor children will take place as follows:

a. Every Wednesday afternoon from 14h30 to 16h30. The Applicant will pick up the minor children from school and drop them off at the home of the Respondent.

b. Every alternative weekend from Friday at 14h30 to Sunday afternoon at 16h30. The Applicant will pick up the minor children from school and drop them off the Respondent’s home on Sunday afternoon.

5. During the time that the minor children are with the Applicant the Respondent can call them via a video call on Saturday at 9h00 and Sunday at 9h00. The Respondent can also send them a voice note at 18h00 on Friday and Saturday at 18h00 to wish them good night. The Applicant will ensure that the voice notes are played to the minor children as part of their bedtime routine. The video calls are for the Respondent only and she is not to add any other people to the call.

6. Family Reconnect will as soon as possible begin with –

a. Parental guidance for both parents.

b. Co- parenting classes for both parents.

c. Conflict resolutions classes.

7. Family Reconnect must, when they deem the parties to be ready, start with the drafting of a parenting plan to regulate the exercising of parental rights and responsibilities of the parties.

8. Family Reconnect is requested to urgently assist the parties to reach an agreement around the upcoming December holidays.

9. The costs of the service provider will be shared between the parties equally.

10. The Applicant and the Respondent must take note of the provisions of Section 35 of the Children’s Act, Act 38 of 2005 and the possible consequences of any non-compliance with this order might have.

NIEUWOUDT, E

ACTING JUDGE OF THE

HIGH COURT

GAUTENG DIVISION,

JOHANNESBURG

The Court would like to thank the parties and Mr Zwane for participating in this process. The Court can see that they both love their children and wants what is best for them.

Date of Hearing: Date of Judgment: 30 and 31 October 2024 01 November 2024 Appearances: For the Applicant: Instructed by: Mr. P. Zwane Peter Zwane Attorneys For the Respondent: Instructed by: Ms. S. Pasiya In Person

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Children’s Act 38 of 2005

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.