M.D v L.N and Another (Reasons) (3051/2020) [2025] ZAECQBHC 4 (3 February 2025)

M.D v L.N and Another (Reasons) (3051/2020) [2025] ZAECQBHC 4 (3 February 2025)

The court found, on the basis of the clinical psychologist’s comprehensive report and the Family Advocate’s recommendations, that the children had been subjected to parental alienation by the first respondent, who involved them in adult conflicts and fostered negative perceptions of the applicant. The first respondent’s failure to cooperate with investigations and her conduct were detrimental to the children’s psychological well-being. The applicant was assessed as capable of acting as the primary carer and fostering a relationship with the first respondent. The best interests of the children required urgent intervention, including a change in primary residence to the applicant,...

Citation
[2025] ZAECQBHC 4
Parties
Applicant: M[...] D[...]; Respondent: L[...] N[...]; Respondent: CHRISTELIKE-MAATSKAPLIKE RAAD (GQEBERHA)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 February 2025
Case Number
3051/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Return Date for Confirmation of Rule Nisi; Reasons for Order
Outcome
Rule nisi confirmed; primary residence of children awarded to applicant; first respondent ordered to pay costs of Part B; supplementary answering affidavit admitted; remaining relief sought by first respondent dismissed.
Judges
T Rossi
Legal Topics
Parental Alienation, Best Interests of Child, Care and Contact, Children S Act, Parenting Coordinator, Therapeutic Intervention
Family and Children Parental Alienation Best Interests of Child Care and Contact Children S Act Parenting Coordinator Therapeutic Intervention

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M[...] D[...]

Applicant

L[...] N[...]

Respondent

CHRISTELIKE-MAATSKAPLIKE RAAD (GQEBERHA)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Return Date for Confirmation of Rule Nisi; Reasons for Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children have been subjected to parental alienation by the first respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the best interests of the children require a change in primary residence.
  3. 3 Whether the first respondent's conduct has been detrimental to the children's psychological well-being.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found, on the basis of the clinical psychologist’s comprehensive report and the Family Advocate’s recommendations, that the children had been subjected to parental alienation by the first respondent, who involved them in adult conflicts and fostered negative perceptions of the applicant. The first respondent’s failure to cooperate with investigations and her conduct were detrimental to the children’s psychological well-being. The applicant was assessed as capable of acting as the primary carer and fostering a relationship with the first respondent. The best interests of the children required urgent intervention, including a change in primary residence to the applicant,...

Court Disposition

Rule nisi confirmed; primary residence of children awarded to applicant; first respondent ordered to pay costs of Part B; supplementary answering affidavit admitted; remaining relief sought by first respondent dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave is granted to the first respondent to file her supplementary answering affidavit.
  • The remaining relief sought by the first respondent in paragraphs 2 to 7 of her notice of motion dated 12 January 2025 is dismissed.