South Africa Case Law

V.R.N v B.L.S (2024/058240)

V.R.N v B.L.S (2024/058240) [2025] ZAGPJHC 701 (18 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/058240

Judge

C Von Ludwig

The applicant failed to prove the existence of a valid and enforceable gamete donor agreement. The evidence showed that he was actively involved in the children’s lives and contributed financially, which is inconsistent with the role of a mere gamete donor. The court found that granting the declaratory order would unjustly deprive the children of paternal support and contravene the paramountcy of their best interests as required by the Children’s Act. The applicant’s reliance on section 40(3) was misplaced, as the provision is intended to protect donors in genuine donor scenarios, not to allo…

Source excerpt

• Parental Responsibilities
• Gamete Donor Agreement
• Children Best Interests
• Declaratory Relief
• Maintenance Obligations

S.V.D.B v H.E.V.D.B (2024/067811)

S.V.D.B v H.E.V.D.B (2024/067811) [2025] ZAGPJHC 313 (20 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/067811

Judge

Mahomed

The court found that the respondent's relocation was bona fide, financially necessary, and not contrary to the children's best interests. The applicant failed to substantiate claims that the move would harm the children and refused to participate in mediation or a voice of the child investigation. The respondent provided sufficient evidence of her employment, new home, and arrangements for the children's schooling and support system in Cape Town. The court held that the applicant's opposition was not based on concrete evidence and that the respondent's proposals for maintaining contact were r…

Source excerpt

• Relocation Of Children
• Primary Residence
• Voice Of Child
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Parental Responsibilities
• Best Interests Of Child

R.B v E.B (3893/2022)

R.B v E.B (3893/2022) [2025] ZALMPPHC 10 (27 January 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

3893/2022

Judge

M Z Makoti

The court changed a shared care arrangement for a young child, placing primary residence with the respondent pending a psychologist’s report, with reasonable contact for the applicant.

• Primary Residence
• Best Interests Of Child
• Variation Of Care Order
• Children S Act
• Parental Responsibilities
• Family Advocate Report

C.L.K v K.K.K (22/010214)

C.L.K v K.K.K (22/010214) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1287 (17 December 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

22/010214

Judge

G Farber

Rule 43 counter-application granted in part: interim maintenance, specified children’s expenses, cell phone reimbursement, and R800,000 costs contribution were ordered; arrear maintenance was refused.

• Interim Maintenance
• Contribution Towards Costs
• Rule 43 Procedure
• Arrear Maintenance
• Parental Responsibilities
• Interim-maintenance

Y.C.M v N.D.N (CA04/2024)

Y.C.M v N.D.N (CA04/2024) [2024] ZAECMKHC 144 (10 December 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA04/2024

Judges

J W Eksteen, O H Ronaasen

The court found that the decisive consideration is the best interests of the children, as required by the Children’s Act. The evidence established that the boys had a meaningful relationship with their grandmother prior to the breakdown caused by the appellant’s animosity. Social workers and the legal representative for the children supported contact, finding no risk to their welfare. The appellant’s opposition was based on personal resentment, not on any substantiated risk to the children. The court held that animosity between adults, absent evidence of harm to the children, does not justify…

Source excerpt

• Children S Act Contact
• Best Interests Of Child
• Extended Family Access
• Parental Responsibilities
• Structured Contact Orders

D.K.F v C.F (Born D.P) (2023-133256)

D.K.F v C.F (Born D.P) (2023-133256) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1154 (8 November 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023-133256

Judge

Gilbert AJ

The court found that the settlement agreement and supporting affidavits failed to address the best interests of both the minor child born of the marriage and the foster child. No evidence was presented as to why shared primary residency and the lack of general maintenance were in the children's best interests, and the views of the Family Advocate and designated social worker were absent. The court held that, as upper guardian, it must ensure that adequate provision is made for all minor children, including foster children, before granting a divorce order. The matter was removed from the roll…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Proceedings
• Best Interests Of Child
• Foster Care
• Parental Responsibilities
• Maintenance
• Shared Residency

N.L.M v G.C.M (4351/2022)

N.L.M v G.C.M (4351/2022) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 74; - (30 September 2024)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

4351/2022

Judge

Mashile

The court found that the Defendant failed to provide evidence that the Plaintiff would be unduly benefited if forfeiture was not granted. Both parties contributed to the joint estate over a substantial marriage duration of nearly 15 years, and there was no proof that the Plaintiff's conduct diminished the estate or justified forfeiture. The Defendant's allegations regarding the Plaintiff's HIV status and supposed infidelity were unsupported by evidence and did not establish grounds for forfeiture. The breakdown of the marriage was attributed to mutual loss of affection, physical abuse by the…

Source excerpt

• Divorce Act Section 9
• Forfeiture Of Patrimonial Benefits
• Division Of Joint Estate
• Parental Responsibilities
• Pension Interest Split

A.R.S v M.S.S (Leave to Appeal) (7305/2021)

A.R.S v M.S.S (Leave to Appeal) (7305/2021) [2024] ZALMPPHC 128 (9 September 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

7305/2021

Judge

Sikhwari

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against a divorce judgment, finding no reasonable prospect of success under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.

• Divorce Act Section 9
• Forfeiture Of Benefits
• Maintenance Order
• Parental Responsibilities
• Leave To Appeal Threshold
• Leave-to-appeal

S.J.W v V.W (Born M) (CA&R 54/2023)

S.J.W v V.W (Born M) (CA&R 54/2023) [2024] ZANCHC 97 (6 September 2024)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R 54/2023

Judges

Williams, LEVER

Appeal in a divorce matter upheld: the High Court ordered payment of 50% of the respondent’s pension interest and added orders on child care, contact, and maintenance referral.

• Divorce Act Section 7
• Pension Interest
• Division Of Joint Estate
• Parental Responsibilities
• Maintenance Of Children
• Divorce-act-section-7

VT v NK (21530/2016)

VT v NK (21530/2016) [2024] ZAWCHC 185 (28 May 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

21530/2016

Judge

N Bawa

High Court divorce judgment granting divorce, approving a parenting plan, reducing child maintenance, refusing spousal maintenance, and ordering tailored property division.

• Customary Marriage
• Division Of Joint Estate
• Forfeiture Of Patrimonial Benefits
• Spousal Maintenance
• Child Maintenance
• Parental Responsibilities