M v S (8928/07) [2009] ZAGPPHC 352 (1 December 2009)

M v S (8928/07) [2009] ZAGPPHC 352 (1 December 2009)

The court found that the minor children are well settled in the applicant’s custody and that the home environment provided by the applicant cannot be bettered. The respondent has wide access to the children, and there is no apparent prejudice to her if the applicant is awarded care and residency. The respondent’s affidavit did not demonstrate that the children would be better off if the arrangement was changed. The court concluded that the best interests of the children are served by maintaining the current arrangement, awarding guardianship to both parties, care and residency to the applicant, and contact rights to the respondent.

Citation
[2009] ZAGPPHC 352
Parties
Applicant: S. R. M.; Respondent: P. S. D.
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 December 2009
Case Number
8928/07
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Determination
Outcome
Application granted in terms of the Children’s Act; parental rights and responsibilities allocated as ordered.
Judges
Sapire
Legal Topics
Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Guardianship, Care and Residency, Contact Rights, Children's Act 2005
Family and Children Parental Rights and Responsibilities Guardianship Care and Residency Contact Rights Children's Act 2005

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S. R. M.

Applicant

P. S. D.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be awarded care and residency of the minor children.
  2. 2 Whether both parties should be awarded guardianship of the minor children.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be awarded contact rights with the minor children.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the minor children are well settled in the applicant’s custody and that the home environment provided by the applicant cannot be bettered. The respondent has wide access to the children, and there is no apparent prejudice to her if the applicant is awarded care and residency. The respondent’s affidavit did not demonstrate that the children would be better off if the arrangement was changed. The court concluded that the best interests of the children are served by maintaining the current arrangement, awarding guardianship to both parties, care and residency to the applicant, and contact rights to the respondent.

Court Disposition

Application granted in terms of the Children’s Act; parental rights and responsibilities allocated as ordered.

Orders

  • Parental rights and responsibilities regarding guardianship of all three minor children are awarded to both parties in terms of Section 18(2)(c) and 18(3) of the Children’s Act.
  • Parental rights and responsibilities regarding care and residency of all three minor children are awarded to the applicant in terms of Section 18(2)(a) of the Children’s Act.