Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family And Children [2021] ZAGPPHC 556

EJ and Others v Haupt NO (63756/2020)

EJ and Others v Haupt NO (63756/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 556; 2022 (1) SA 514 (GP) (11 August 2021)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
63756/2020
Judge
Neukircher

The court held that section 40 of the Children’s Act must be interpreted to include spouses in a civil union, in line with the constitutional imperative to avoid discrimination and promote equality. The use of the word 'spouse' in section 40(1) demonstrates legislative intent to include same-sex couples, and the exclusionary wording in section 40(3)(b) is limited to the context of a male gamete donor. The court found that both applicants, as spouses in a civil union, automatically acquire full parental rights and responsibilities in respect of the minor child born via artificial insemination,…

Source excerpt

  • Civil Union Act
  • Parental Rights And Responsibilities
  • Artificial Insemination
  • Birth Registration
  • Equality Clause
  • Best Interests Of Child
Read case analysis
Family And Children [2012] ZAWCHC 37

C.M v N.G (8026/2011)

C.M v N.G (8026/2011) [2012] ZAWCHC 37; 2012 (4) SA 452 (WCC); [2012] 3 All SA 104 (WCC) (26 April 2012)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
8026/2011
Judge
Gangen

The court found that the applicant and respondent jointly intended to have a child and both acted as parents during the child's formative years. The Children's Act does not restrict parental responsibilities and rights to biological or married parents. Section 23 must be interpreted to allow the court to grant both care and contact to an interested person where it serves the child's best interests. Section 24(3) does not require deprivation of the existing guardian's rights for co-guardianship; the High Court retains inherent jurisdiction to grant joint guardianship. The evidence established…

Source excerpt

  • Parental Responsibilities And Rights
  • Children S Act
  • Co Guardianship
  • Best Interests Of Child
  • Artificial Insemination
  • Parental Plan
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2003] ZACC 3

J and Another v Director General, Department of Home Affairs and Others (CCT46/02)

J and Another v Director General, Department of Home Affairs and Others (CCT46/02) [2003] ZACC 3; 2003 (5) BCLR 463 ; 2003 (5) SA 621 (CC) (28 March 2003)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT46/02
Judges
Goldstone, Chaskalson, Langa, Ackermann, Madala, Mokgoro, Moseneke, O'Regan, Yacoob

Section 5 of the Children’s Status Act 82 of 1987 is unconstitutional to the extent that it excludes permanent same-sex life partners from legal recognition as parents of children conceived by artificial insemination. This exclusion constitutes unfair discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and marital status, contrary to section 9(3) of the Constitution. The appropriate remedy is to strike out the word 'married' wherever it appears in section 5 and to read in the words 'or permanent same-sex life partner' after 'husband' wherever it appears. The Court declined to extend the remed…

Source excerpt

  • Sexual Orientation Discrimination
  • Status Of Children
  • Reading In And Striking Out
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
  • Parental Rights
  • Artificial Insemination
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.