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
M.A.D. v R.G. (2025/047056) [2025] ZAGPJHC 543 (27 May 2025)
An urgent Rule 43(6) application partly succeeded: the High Court ordered immediate therapy for a minor child and referred the matter to the Family Advocate.
JK v JK (2020/40619) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1275 (11 December 2024)
The court referred the child-residency dispute to the Family Advocate, set aside an earlier contact restriction, and made costs orders for the earlier and current proceedings.
C.S.S v O.R (000763/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 37 (26 January 2024)
The court found the matter urgent due to the imminent school term and the need to protect the children's best interests. However, it declined to grant the applicant's request for immediate return of the children, citing the absence of a Family Advocate investigation and the need to consider the children's views and welfare. The court ordered the Family Advocate to urgently investigate and report on the children's best interests regarding residence and contact. Pending this report, the children are to remain with the respondent, with the applicant granted reasonable contact. The respondent may…
Source excerpt
WLB and Another v BSB (2023-126880) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2050 (22 December 2023)
An urgent application to transfer two minor children to their paternal grandmother was dismissed, with the Family Advocate ordered to investigate care, residence and contact.
D.J.H v A.H (914/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 46 (4 April 2023)
The court limited the Family Advocate’s inquiry to relocation issues and refused to reopen the settled primary-caregiver question, granting interim relief by agreement.
N.J.V v L.C.S (32844/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 638 (25 August 2022)
The High Court ordered the respondent to undergo a drug test and kept interim care and contact arrangements in line with the Family Advocate’s recommendations.
B.A.H and Another v L.D.P (3076/2019) [2019] ZAECGHC 114 (14 November 2019)
The High Court ordered a Family Advocate investigation into the best interests of a minor child, kept the current temporary care arrangement in place, and stayed related Children’s Court proceedings.
Pringle v Fourie (748/2019) [2019] ZAECPEHC 21 (4 March 2019)
The court found, on the probabilities, that the respondent had relapsed into drug use, notwithstanding her denial and the negative urine test. The evidence from multiple sources, including admissions, corroborating affidavits, and concerning behaviour, outweighed the respondent's explanations. The risk to the minor child in the respondent's care was deemed self-evident given the history of addiction and recent conduct. The court held that an interim change in primary care to the applicant would provide stability and protect the child's immediate interests, pending a full investigation by the…
Source excerpt
T.L.S v V.M.L (728393/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 929 (30 September 2016)
The court found the matter urgent, as the applicant had been denied access to the minor child and the child's environment had been abruptly altered. The requirements of Rule 6(12)(b) were satisfied, as substantial redress could not be afforded in the ordinary course. While section 33 of the Children's Act encourages mediation and parenting plans, the court held that in the present circumstances—where the parties were deadlocked, parenting rights had been interfered with, and allegations of domestic violence existed—mediation was not practical. The best interests of the child required interim…
Source excerpt
Majikija v Mxo and Another (1596/2015) [2016] ZAECPEHC 7 (8 March 2016)
The court granted condonation for late filing, ordered a further Family Advocate investigation, and extended a rule nisi in a child-care dispute.
Explore more
