K.S.C v D.D.M and Another (2023/02208) [2023] ZAGPJHC 537 (21 May 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] ZAGPJHC 537
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Panel
- GC Wright
- Case number
- 2023/02208
More details
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Panel
- GC Wright
- Case number
- 2023/02208
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicant had made out a case for relief. The father's refusal to sign the consent form was not based on substantive objection to the trip but rather a reluctance to participate in the process. The WhatsApp messages indicated no genuine opposition to the travel. The court considered the best interests of the child and the absence of any valid reason for withholding consent. Accordingly, the court granted the order permitting the applicant to travel.
Court disposition
Order granted permitting the applicant to travel without the father's written consent.
Orders
- The applicant is permitted to travel to Dubai for four days with her mother without the father's written consent.
- Order issued in terms of X.
02
Material facts
Parties
K.S.C
Applicant Counsel: Applicant in person and her attorneyD.D.M
RespondentDepartment of Home Affairs
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant, a minor, may travel internationally without the father's written consent.
- 02
Whether the father's refusal constitutes a valid objection to the trip.
- 03
Whether the court should grant an order permitting travel in the absence of paternal consent.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant, a minor, seeks the court's permission to travel to Dubai with her mother for four days. She has obtained plane tickets and visas but requires her father's written consent as she is under 18. The applicant contends that the father's refusal is not based on substantive objection but rather a reluctance to sign, as evidenced by WhatsApp messages indicating he is not against the trip.
- Respondent
- The respondent father did not appear in court and failed to join the scheduled Teams hearing despite being sent a link. His WhatsApp messages suggest he is not opposed to the trip but refuses to sign the consent form, stating he will not sign even if pressured.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Children's Act 38 of 2005
A minor requires parental consent for international travel, but the court may intervene where consent is unreasonably withheld.
- 02
Section 28(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
The best interests of the child are paramount in all matters concerning children.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicant had made out a case for relief. The father's refusal to sign the consent form was not based on substantive objection to the trip but rather a reluctance to participate in the process. The WhatsApp messages indicated no genuine opposition to the travel. The court considered the best interests of the child and the absence of any valid reason for withholding consent. Accordingly, the court granted the order permitting the applicant to travel.
Obiter and limits
- The court notes the importance of parental cooperation in matters affecting children, especially where no substantive objection exists.
- Failure to participate in court proceedings may result in orders being granted in the absence of opposition.
Court disposition
Order granted permitting the applicant to travel without the father's written consent.
- The applicant is permitted to travel to Dubai for four days with her mother without the father's written consent.
- Order issued in terms of X.
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.
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Judgment
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 2023/02208
NOT REPORTABLE
NOT OF INTEREST TO
OTHER JUDGES
REVISED
21.05.23
In the matter between:
K.S.C Applicant and D.D.M 1st Respondent
DEPARTMENT
OF HOME AFFAIRS 2nd Respondent
Neutral Citation: K.S.C v D.D.M & Another (Case No: 02208/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 537 (21 May 2023)
JUDGMENT
WRIGHT J
1. The applicant is a woman who will turn 18 in two months’ time. She and her mother have arranged to go to Dubai this evening for a four day visit. Plane tickets have been bought and visas obtained. As the applicant is under 18 she needs her father’s consent.
2. The respondent father has not consented but Whatsapp messages show that he is not against the trip. He suggests that someone else signs. He says that he won’t sign even if the whole army arrives.
3. He failed to join a Teams hearing even though he was sent a link.
4. In my view a case is made out.
ORDER
1. Order ito X.
GC Wright
Judge of the High Court
Gauteng Division, Johannesburg
HEARD : 21 May 2023
DELIVERED : 21 May 2023
APPEARANCES :
APPLICANT Applicant in person and her attorney. johanna.mohlahlo@gmail.com 076 092 9920
RESPONDENT No appearance
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.