H.R.V.D.M v C.J.C.V.D.M (2022/27049) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1018 (11 September 2023)

H.R.V.D.M v C.J.C.V.D.M (2022/27049) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1018 (11 September 2023)

The court finds that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence in his founding affidavit to justify an extension of access to the minor child. The psychologist's letter, submitted in reply, should have been included in the founding papers. Given the serious allegations raised by the respondent regarding the applicant's mental health and substance abuse, and in the absence of a Family Advocate report, it would be unwise to interfere with the current access arrangements. The best interests of the child require maintaining stability until a thorough investigation is completed.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 1018
Parties
Applicant: H.R.V.D.M; Respondent: C.J.C.V.D.M
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 September 2023
Case Number
2022/27049
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Access Application Pending Divorce and Family Advocate Report
Outcome
Application to extend access dismissed pending Family Advocate report.
Judges
Wright
Legal Topics
Interim Child Access, Parental Rights, Family Advocate Report, Substance Abuse Allegations
Family and Children Interim Child Access Parental Rights Family Advocate Report Substance Abuse Allegations

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H.R.V.D.M

Applicant

C.J.C.V.D.M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Access Application Pending Divorce and Family Advocate Report

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's access to the minor child should be extended pending the Family Advocate's report.
  2. 2 Whether allegations of substance abuse and mental health issues affect the applicant's suitability for increased access.

Ratio Decidendi

The court finds that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence in his founding affidavit to justify an extension of access to the minor child. The psychologist's letter, submitted in reply, should have been included in the founding papers. Given the serious allegations raised by the respondent regarding the applicant's mental health and substance abuse, and in the absence of a Family Advocate report, it would be unwise to interfere with the current access arrangements. The best interests of the child require maintaining stability until a thorough investigation is completed.

Court Disposition

Application to extend access dismissed pending Family Advocate report.

Orders

  • The current access arrangements remain in place until the Family Advocate's report is available.
  • No order as to costs.