Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
S.J.Q v P.F (2023/052634) [2023] ZAGPJHC 923 (15 August 2023)
Urgent custody application dismissed after the court found the applicant manufactured urgency and misrepresented the social worker’s advice about the child’s transplant care.
R.M.D v K.D (16995/22P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 2 (13 January 2023)
The court found that the animosity and lack of cooperation between the parents had created unnecessary urgency and conflict, but the overriding consideration was the best interests of the minor child. Both parents were capable caregivers, but the child, being five years old and impressionable, required stability and a nurturing environment. The respondent, the mother, provided a settled home and a positive support system, and the psychologist's report raised concerns about the applicant's behaviour and unilateral decision-making. The court rejected the applicant's disparaging remarks about th…
Source excerpt
A.G v D.S.G and Another (59992/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 710 (16 August 2016)
The court dismissed an urgent custody application, ordered the children to remain with the father, and allowed the mother only supervised contact pending evaluation.
L and Others (20403/2015), R v [2015] ZAGPPHC 777 (12 November 2015)
The court found that the applicant, as the biological mother, was entitled to full parental responsibilities and rights in terms of the Children's Act. The evidence showed that the second and third respondents, rather than the first respondent, exercised primary care over the minor child, often to the exclusion and alienation of the applicant. Expert reports did not find the applicant to be an unfit mother, and she complied with all recommendations to improve her parenting skills. The court held that the repeated extension of interim orders by the Children's Court was unjustified, especially…
Source excerpt
Family Advocate v F ; F v F and Others (3245/14 , 3454/14) [2014] ZAECPEHC 93 (28 November 2014)
The court found, on a balance of probabilities, that the complainant did not consent to the permanent relocation of the minor child to South Africa, but only to a holiday visit. The respondent’s actions in retaining the child and refusing to return her to the United Kingdom constituted wrongful retention under the Hague Convention. The evidence did not support the respondent’s defence of consent or acquiescence, nor did it establish a grave risk to the child under Article 13(1)(b). The best interests of the child, while paramount under South African law, do not override the Convention’s requi…
Source excerpt
A.G.E v R.A.J.E (3718/2013) [2014] ZAKZDHC 10 (26 March 2014)
The court refused a mother's application to relocate a minor child to Luxemburg, holding the child's best interests required remaining in the father's care in South Africa.
V Z v V Z (46716/08) [2009] ZAGPPHC 52 (14 May 2009)
In an urgent custody dispute settled by consent, the High Court made no order as to costs, finding both parties had contributed to the conflict.
Parker and Another v Van Zyl and Others (1249/2006 , 48/2006) [2006] ZAECHC 63 (16 November 2006)
High Court costs ruling in a custody-and-adoption dispute: each side was ordered to bear its own costs, except costs of argument on costs, payable by the respondents.
Santos v Santos (33232/2005) [2005] ZAGPHC 338 (11 November 2005)
In an interim custody dispute pending divorce, the court awarded custody of two young boys to their mother, stressing stability, daily care, and nursery school.
Smith v Smith (112/2000) [2001] ZASCA 19; [2001] 3 All SA 146 (A); 2001 (3) SA 845 (SCA) (16 March 2001)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the father had acquiesced in the children’s retention in South Africa under the Hague Convention and dismissed the return appeal.
Explore more
