K v K (22/8285) [2022] ZAGPJHC 147 (14 March 2022)

K v K (22/8285) [2022] ZAGPJHC 147 (14 March 2022)

The court found that, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, a parent is entitled to know the whereabouts of their minor children. The respondent's refusal to disclose the address was not justified by the evidence presented. The allegations of abuse and duress were not substantiated in detail and related more to the relationship between the parties than to the applicant's relationship with the children. The court held that pendente lite shared residence was in the best interests of the children, as it provided certainty and consistency. The convoluted arrangements in the disputed settlement agreements were simplified by the court's order to avoid unnecessary disputes and...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 147
Parties
Applicant: K[....], P[....]; Respondent: K[....], T[....] I[....] (born S[....])
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 March 2022
Case Number
22/8285
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Relief Pending Divorce Proceedings
Outcome
Interim order granted for disclosure of children's address and pendente lite shared residence arrangements; costs to be borne individually.
Judges
Moorcroft
Legal Topics
Shared Residence, Parental Responsibilities and Rights, Best Interests of Child, Disclosure of Address
Family and Children Shared Residence Parental Responsibilities and Rights Best Interests of Child Disclosure of Address

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

K[....], P[....]

Applicant

K[....], T[....] I[....] (born S[....])

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Relief Pending Divorce Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent must disclose the physical address where the minor children reside to the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether pendente lite shared residence is in the best interests of the minor children.
  3. 3 Whether the settlement agreements regarding shared residence are valid or were signed under duress.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, in the absence of extraordinary circumstances, a parent is entitled to know the whereabouts of their minor children. The respondent's refusal to disclose the address was not justified by the evidence presented. The allegations of abuse and duress were not substantiated in detail and related more to the relationship between the parties than to the applicant's relationship with the children. The court held that pendente lite shared residence was in the best interests of the children, as it provided certainty and consistency. The convoluted arrangements in the disputed settlement agreements were simplified by the court's order to avoid unnecessary disputes and...

Court Disposition

Interim order granted for disclosure of children's address and pendente lite shared residence arrangements; costs to be borne individually.

Orders

  • The respondent is directed to disclose the physical address where the minor children reside, and any future or alternative temporary or permanent physical address, to the applicant.
  • The Family Advocate is requested to proceed with an investigation and report; the parties and minor children shall attend the scheduled appointment on 4 May 2022 at 09h00.