L.M.P v C.T.M (590/2014)
L.M.P v C.T.M (590/2014) [2017] ZAECPEHC 14 (14 February 2017)
The court found that the respondent's opposition to sole guardianship was motivated by animosity towards the applicant's remarriage rather than the child's best interests. The evidence demonstrated that L's emotional and economic security was best served by the applicant, who provided a stable and nurturing environment. The respondent's conduct, including refusal to consent to travel and schooling, was found to be obstructive and not in L's best interests. The court accepted the psychologist's recommendation that further therapy was unlikely to restore the relationship and that L should not b…
Source excerpt
- Sole Guardianship
- Children S Act
- Best Interests Of Child
- Parental Responsibilities
- Custody
- Consent For Minor Travel