S.B v S.S (D4934/2019) [2022] ZAKZDHC 39 (8 September 2022)

S.B v S.S (D4934/2019) [2022] ZAKZDHC 39 (8 September 2022)

The court found that the respondent's opposition to unsupervised contact was malicious and unsupported by professional evidence. The child's psychological vulnerability necessitates careful management of the reunification process. The applicant should be allowed unsupervised contact, but only after the completion of reunification therapy and a psychological evaluation. The order prioritizes the child's best interests, mandates therapy and assessment, and provides mechanisms to address non-cooperation by either party. The court emphasized that any frustration of the applicant's rights or alienation of the child from her father could result in a change of residence. The arrangement is...

Citation
[2022] ZAKZDHC 39
Parties
Applicant: S[....] B[....]; Respondent: S[....]2 S[....]3
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 September 2022
Case Number
D4934/2019
Procedural Posture
Family Application / Final Order and Directions
Outcome
The applicant and respondent are declared co-holders of full parental responsibilities and rights. The child shall reside primarily with the respondent. Reunification therapy and psychological evaluation are ordered. Applications regarding contempt and contact rights are adjourned sine die.
Judges
Ploos Van Amstel
Legal Topics
Parental Responsibilities and Rights, Child Residence, Supervised Contact, Psychological Evaluation, Reunification Therapy
Family and Children Parental Responsibilities and Rights Child Residence Supervised Contact Psychological Evaluation Reunification Therapy

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

Parties

S[....] B[....]

Applicant

S[....]2 S[....]3

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Application / Final Order and Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted unsupervised contact with the minor child.
  2. 2 How the child's psychological well-being and relationship with her father and paternal grandparents should be managed.
  3. 3 What arrangements are in the best interests of the minor child regarding therapy and evaluation.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's opposition to unsupervised contact was malicious and unsupported by professional evidence. The child's psychological vulnerability necessitates careful management of the reunification process. The applicant should be allowed unsupervised contact, but only after the completion of reunification therapy and a psychological evaluation. The order prioritizes the child's best interests, mandates therapy and assessment, and provides mechanisms to address non-cooperation by either party. The court emphasized that any frustration of the applicant's rights or alienation of the child from her father could result in a change of residence. The arrangement is...

Court Disposition

The applicant and respondent are declared co-holders of full parental responsibilities and rights. The child shall reside primarily with the respondent. Reunification therapy and psychological evaluation are ordered. Applications regarding contempt and contact rights are adjourned sine die.

Orders

  • The applicant and respondent are declared co-holders of full parental responsibilities and rights in respect of the minor child.
  • The minor child shall reside primarily with the respondent.