P W v A W and Others (2018/47013) [2019] ZAGPJHC 168 (7 February 2019)

P W v A W and Others (2018/47013) [2019] ZAGPJHC 168 (7 February 2019)

The applicant has a direct and substantial interest in the appointment of curators to her daughter and is entitled to have her views considered. However, the procedure adopted—an urgent application for leave to intervene—is not sanctioned by Uniform Rule 57, which provides for an inquisitorial process rather than adversarial intervention. The correct approach would have been for the applicant to submit her concerns and requests to the Curatrix ad Litem, who is obliged to consider such submissions when compiling her report for the court. While the application for leave to intervene is dismissed as unprocedural, the applicant's submissions must be considered by the Curatrix ad Litem in the...

Citation
[2019] ZAGPJHC 168
Parties
Applicant: P W; Respondent: A W; Respondent: RITA HENN & PARTNERS INC t/a R H P REHAB; Respondent: Vergano, Adv Viviana N O
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 February 2019
Case Number
2018/47013
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Leave to Intervene in Ex Parte Curator Appointment Proceedings
Outcome
Application for leave to intervene dismissed; applicant's submissions to be considered by Curatrix ad Litem; each party to bear own costs.
Judges
L R Adams
Legal Topics
Curatorship, Intervention Application, Rule 57 Procedure, Appointment of Curator, Urgent Application
Civil Procedure Family and Children Curatorship Intervention Application Rule 57 Procedure Appointment of Curator Urgent Application

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

P W

Applicant

A W

Respondent

RITA HENN & PARTNERS INC t/a R H P REHAB

Respondent

Vergano, Adv Viviana N O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Leave to Intervene in Ex Parte Curator Appointment Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to intervene as a respondent in the ex parte application for the appointment of curators to her daughter.
  2. 2 Whether the procedure adopted by the applicant to seek leave to intervene is permissible under Uniform Rule 57.
  3. 3 What consideration should be given to the applicant's submissions regarding the appointment of curators.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant has a direct and substantial interest in the appointment of curators to her daughter and is entitled to have her views considered. However, the procedure adopted—an urgent application for leave to intervene—is not sanctioned by Uniform Rule 57, which provides for an inquisitorial process rather than adversarial intervention. The correct approach would have been for the applicant to submit her concerns and requests to the Curatrix ad Litem, who is obliged to consider such submissions when compiling her report for the court. While the application for leave to intervene is dismissed as unprocedural, the applicant's submissions must be considered by the Curatrix ad Litem in the...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to intervene dismissed; applicant's submissions to be considered by Curatrix ad Litem; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's urgent application for leave to intervene in the ex parte application of the first respondent is dismissed.
  • The applicant's application for leave to intervene, including all affidavits and annexures, as well as the first respondent's opposing affidavit and annexures, shall form part of the record of the ex parte application.