M v N (2021/22911) [2022] ZAGPJHC 882 (10 November 2022)

M v N (2021/22911) [2022] ZAGPJHC 882 (10 November 2022)

The court found that the relationship between the applicant and the minor child is fraught, with evidence of parental alienation and the child's strong resistance to contact. Both parties contributed to the breakdown, and the child's views, while considered, are influenced by the respondent and her own immaturity. The best interests of the child require a gradual reintroduction of contact, supported by professional intervention through therapy and reconstructive sessions. The court declined to restrict contact with the applicant's extended family, recognizing the applicant's physical limitations and need for assistance. The court ordered a structured contact regime, appointment of...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 882
Parties
Applicant: M [....] 1, M [....] 2 V [....] Z [....]; Respondent: M[....] 3 C [....] N [....]
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 November 2022
Case Number
2021/22911
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Interim Relief Pending Divorce Proceedings
Outcome
Application granted in part; interim care and contact regime ordered with professional interventions and structured contact schedule.
Judges
Engelbrecht
Legal Topics
Parental Responsibilities and Rights, Care and Contact, Parental Alienation, Children's Act, Voice of the Child, Interim Relief
Family and Children Parental Responsibilities and Rights Care and Contact Parental Alienation Children's Act Voice of the Child Interim Relief

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M [....] 1, M [....] 2 V [....] Z [....]

Applicant

M[....] 3 C [....] N [....]

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Interim Relief Pending Divorce Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate interim care and contact regime for the minor child pending finalization of divorce proceedings.
  2. 2 Should contact between the applicant and the minor child be supervised and/or subject to reconstructive therapy.
  3. 3 Is it necessary to appoint a parenting coordinator or other professionals to assist the parties and the minor child.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the relationship between the applicant and the minor child is fraught, with evidence of parental alienation and the child's strong resistance to contact. Both parties contributed to the breakdown, and the child's views, while considered, are influenced by the respondent and her own immaturity. The best interests of the child require a gradual reintroduction of contact, supported by professional intervention through therapy and reconstructive sessions. The court declined to restrict contact with the applicant's extended family, recognizing the applicant's physical limitations and need for assistance. The court ordered a structured contact regime, appointment of...

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; interim care and contact regime ordered with professional interventions and structured contact schedule.

Orders

  • Pendente lite, parties to co-hold full parental responsibilities and rights in respect of the minor child as per Section 18 of the Children's Act.
  • The minor child shall reside primarily with the respondent.