S.D.I v K.L.V.C and Another (11137/2013) [2014] ZAKZDHC 11 (4 April 2014)

S.D.I v K.L.V.C and Another (11137/2013) [2014] ZAKZDHC 11 (4 April 2014)

The court found that the applicant met all three requirements of section 21(1)(b) of the Children’s Act: he consented to be identified as the father, contributed or attempted in good faith to contribute to the child’s upbringing for a reasonable period, and contributed or attempted in good faith to contribute towards expenses in connection with the maintenance of the child. The evidence showed actual and good faith contributions, including financial support, personal involvement, and offers to pay maintenance. The respondent’s removal of the child from South Africa to England and Wales without the applicant’s consent or court permission was therefore unlawful under South African law. The...

Citation
[2014] ZAKZDHC 11
Parties
Applicant: S[...] D[...] I[...]; Respondent: K[...] L[...] V[...] C[...]; Respondent: Office of the Family Advocate
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 April 2014
Case Number
11137/2013
Procedural Posture
Family Application / Judgment
Outcome
The application is granted. The respondent’s removal of the child without the applicant’s consent or court permission was unlawful under South African law.
Judges
Gabriel A J
Legal Topics
Parental Responsibilities and Rights, Children S Act Interpretation, International Child Abduction, Hague Convention, Unmarried Fathers Rights
Family and Children Parental Responsibilities and Rights Children S Act Interpretation International Child Abduction Hague Convention Unmarried Fathers Rights

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

Parties

S[...] D[...] I[...]

Applicant

K[...] L[...] V[...] C[...]

Respondent

Office of the Family Advocate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant, as an unmarried biological father, automatically acquired full parental responsibilities and rights under section 21(1)(b) of the Children’s Act.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was lawfully entitled under South African law to remove the child from South Africa to England and Wales without the applicant’s consent or court permission.
  3. 3 Whether the requirements of section 21(1)(b)(i)-(iii) were met by the applicant prior to the child’s removal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant met all three requirements of section 21(1)(b) of the Children’s Act: he consented to be identified as the father, contributed or attempted in good faith to contribute to the child’s upbringing for a reasonable period, and contributed or attempted in good faith to contribute towards expenses in connection with the maintenance of the child. The evidence showed actual and good faith contributions, including financial support, personal involvement, and offers to pay maintenance. The respondent’s removal of the child from South Africa to England and Wales without the applicant’s consent or court permission was therefore unlawful under South African law. The...

Court Disposition

The application is granted. The respondent’s removal of the child without the applicant’s consent or court permission was unlawful under South African law.

Orders

  • In November 2012 it was not lawful under South African law, having regard to the circumstances of this case, for the respondent to change the place of residence of the child from South Africa to England and Wales without the prior permission or consent of the applicant or other appropriate South African Court.
  • The respondent is directed to pay the applicant’s costs, such costs to include the costs of two counsel where employed.