TH v AT (12091 / 2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 124 (14 June 2022)

TH v AT (12091 / 2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 124 (14 June 2022)

The court refused the respondent's application to relocate with the minor child prior to the child reaching the age of three years, finding that such relocation would not be bona fide, reasonable, or in the child's best interests. The respondent failed to provide adequate plans or details regarding accommodation, care, and maintenance at the proposed relocation destination. Expert evidence indicated that the minor child had formed an attachment to the applicant and presented developmental anomalies requiring stability and continued contact with both parents. The respondent's motivations for relocation were questionable, and her conduct demonstrated disregard for court orders and...

Citation
[2022] ZAWCHC 124
Parties
Applicant: TH; Respondent: AT
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 June 2022
Case Number
12091 / 2021
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Reasons for Final Order Refusing Relocation and Granting Parenting Coordinator
Outcome
Application for relocation refused; comprehensive interim order granted regulating parental responsibilities, contact, maintenance, and appointment of parenting coordinator; costs awarded against respondent.
Judges
E D Wille
Legal Topics
Relocation of Minor Child, Parental Responsibilities and Rights, Parenting Coordinator, Maintenance Order, Best Interests of Child, Costs Award
Family and Children Civil Procedure Relocation of Minor Child Parental Responsibilities and Rights Parenting Coordinator Maintenance Order Best Interests of Child Costs Award

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TH

Applicant

AT

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Reasons for Final Order Refusing Relocation and Granting Parenting Coordinator

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be permitted to relocate with the minor child prior to the child reaching the age of three years.
  2. 2 What contact and parental responsibilities and rights arrangements serve the best interests of the minor child.
  3. 3 Whether a parenting coordinator should be appointed to mediate disputes between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the respondent's application to relocate with the minor child prior to the child reaching the age of three years, finding that such relocation would not be bona fide, reasonable, or in the child's best interests. The respondent failed to provide adequate plans or details regarding accommodation, care, and maintenance at the proposed relocation destination. Expert evidence indicated that the minor child had formed an attachment to the applicant and presented developmental anomalies requiring stability and continued contact with both parents. The respondent's motivations for relocation were questionable, and her conduct demonstrated disregard for court orders and...

Court Disposition

Application for relocation refused; comprehensive interim order granted regulating parental responsibilities, contact, maintenance, and appointment of parenting coordinator; costs awarded against respondent.

Orders

  • The parties shall remain co-guardians and co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights in respect of the minor child as provided in the Children's Act.
  • The respondent shall not relocate outside a 20 km radius from the Western Cape High Court until the child is three years old and only if specified conditions are met.