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
E.A.L-B v A.V.M (066657/2023) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1167 (17 October 2023)
The court found no urgency in a family-law application about two minor children, declined to uphold contempt, and ordered the applicant to pay costs.
J.J.A v A.A (2022/021236) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1045 (15 September 2023)
Urgent custody dispute in which the court kept the children primarily with the respondent, ordered a Family Advocate report, and reserved costs.
C.K v D.H (2896/23) [2023] ZAWCHC 54 (16 March 2023)
The court held an urgent care-and-contact dispute over a minor child, ordered a family advocate investigation, kept interim care with the respondent, and granted supervised maternal contact.
Brenkman v Bouwer (43606/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 592 (13 September 2021)
The High Court dismissed an urgent contempt application over supervised contact, clarified who may act as an independent third party, and ordered each party to pay its own costs.
C v D (11120/2002) [2014] ZAGPJHC 286 (10 June 2014)
The High Court ordered phased, supervised contact between a father and his minor daughter, finding the mother had frustrated contact and that the child’s best interests required intervention.
Duncan v Coetzee (3888/11) [2012] ZAECPEHC 71 (25 September 2012)
The court varied child contact arrangements after the father’s mental health issues and recent suicide attempt, ordering supervised contact for six months.
C.R.I v M.R.I (EL 1691/11, ECD 2228/11) [2012] ZAECELLC 13 (24 August 2012)
The High Court ordered supervised contact between a father and his two minor children, despite their refusal, applying the best-interests test and section 10 of the Children's Act.
G.J.K and Another v K.A.S.K (born B) (1214/09) [2010] ZAECPEHC 15 (4 May 2010)
The High Court varied a custody arrangement by agreement and made no costs order, finding the respondent’s limited opposition in a child-related dispute was bona fide.
Explore more
