T.L.D v B.G (015642/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 872 (4 August 2023)

T.L.D v B.G (015642/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 872 (4 August 2023)

The court found that the respondent failed to raise any new or compelling grounds for leave to appeal. The issues raised were already addressed in the original judgment, and the expert opinion relied upon was well-reasoned. The order in question is not final in effect, as it only temporarily suspends contact between the respondent and the minor child and does not dispose of the main relief sought in the proceedings. Applying the higher threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, the court concluded that there are no reasonable prospects of success on appeal and that the order is not appealable. The application for leave to appeal was therefore...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPJHC 872
Parties
Applicant: T L D; Respondent: B G
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
4 August 2023
Case Number
015642/2022
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Parental Responsibilities and Rights
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
L R Adams
Legal Topics
Parental Responsibilities and Rights, Appealability, Best Interests of Child, Parental Alienation, Leave to Appeal Threshold
Family and Children Civil Procedure Parental Responsibilities and Rights Appealability Best Interests of Child Parental Alienation Leave to Appeal Threshold

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T L D

Applicant

B G

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment on Parental Responsibilities and Rights

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order granted on 13 July 2023 is appealable.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent has demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the court erred in making final orders affecting the minor child without oral evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent failed to raise any new or compelling grounds for leave to appeal. The issues raised were already addressed in the original judgment, and the expert opinion relied upon was well-reasoned. The order in question is not final in effect, as it only temporarily suspends contact between the respondent and the minor child and does not dispose of the main relief sought in the proceedings. Applying the higher threshold for leave to appeal under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, the court concluded that there are no reasonable prospects of success on appeal and that the order is not appealable. The application for leave to appeal was therefore...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The respondent’s application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.