South Africa Case Law

BHGH v GH (041781/2024)

BHGH v GH (041781/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 746 (16 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

041781/2024

Judge

Minnaar

The court found that the allegations of sexual misconduct against the applicant are serious and that the minor child, being under three years old, is particularly vulnerable. The best interests of the child must take precedence over the applicant’s right to contact. The interim protection order, which prohibits contact pending a forensic investigation, is justified given the gravity of the allegations. The applicant’s failure to anticipate the return date of the interim order and clear his name was noted as concerning. The court held that neither reinstatement of contact nor supervised contac…

Source excerpt

• Best Interests Of Child
• Parental Rights And Responsibilities
• Interim Protection Order
• Rule 43 Variation
• Supervised Contact

A.S v R.J-L.E (2025-081159)

A.S v R.J-L.E (2025-081159) [2025] ZAGPJHC 633 (20 June 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2025-081159

Judge

FMM Reid

The court found that, despite two existing orders placing primary care and residence of the minor child with the respondent, the respondent voluntarily handed the child to the applicant for an extended period, indicating recognition of the applicant's suitability as primary caregiver. The court held that the best interests of the child are paramount and that substance must prevail over procedural formality. Given the allegations of alcoholism and mental instability, which the respondent denies but agrees to be tested for, and the applicant's demonstrated ability to provide care with assistanc…

Source excerpt

• Primary Care And Residence
• Best Interests Of Child
• Variation Of Court Order
• Supervised Contact
• Mental Health Assessment

Y.S v S.S (9895/25)

Y.S v S.S (9895/25) [2025] ZAWCHC 125 (18 March 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

9895/25

Judge

Thulare

High Court family matter on child contact: the court dismissed a request to appoint a new psychologist, confirmed ongoing reintegration therapy, and ordered supervised contact.

• Parental Responsibilities And Rights
• Supervised Contact
• Best Interests Of Child
• Parenting Plan
• Reintegration Therapy
• Best-interests-of-child

S.P v C.H.P and Another (016689/2025)

S.P v C.H.P and Another (016689/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 267 (17 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

016689/2025

Judge

E Joyini

Urgent family-law dispute over child contact. The High Court refused supervised-contact relief, upheld the existing divorce decree, and granted condonation.

• Parental Responsibilities And Rights
• Best Interests Of Child
• Supervised Contact
• Divorce Decree Enforcement
• Condonation For Late Filing
• Family-law

L.E.N v S.T.N (2025/021458)

L.E.N v S.T.N (2025/021458) [2025] ZAGPJHC 220 (28 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2025/021458

Judge

Du Plessis

The High Court granted interim primary residence of two minor children to their mother pending a forensic psychological assessment and further order.

• Primary Residence
• Child Abuse Allegations
• Best Interests Of Child
• Forensic Psychological Assessment
• Supervised Contact
• Interim Relief

C.J.V.C v M.V (005318/2025)

C.J.V.C v M.V (005318/2025) [2025] ZAGPJHC 176 (23 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

005318/2025

Judge

Abro

The court found that the applicant is vested with full parental responsibilities and rights in respect of the minor child under section 21 of the Children’s Act, as the parties lived together in a permanent life partnership at the time of the child's birth and the applicant has contributed to her upbringing and maintenance. The respondent's history of severe alcohol abuse and repeated relapses, coupled with her conduct in removing the child from the applicant's care, demonstrated a disregard for the child's best interests and safety. The High Court, as upper guardian, intervened to protect th…

Source excerpt

• Parental Responsibilities And Rights
• Children's Act Section 21
• Urgent Interim Care
• Supervised Contact
• Alcohol Abuse And Parenting
• Best Interests Of Child

J.A.R v L.LR (017913/2024)

J.A.R v L.LR (017913/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 910 (12 September 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

017913/2024

Judge

Retief

The High Court found both parents’ conflict was harming the child and appointed a new parenting coordinator, ending the previous coordinator’s role and confirming the parenting plan.

• Parenting Coordination
• Psychological Abuse
• Parenting Plan
• Children S Best Interests
• Supervised Contact
• Costs Order

N.H.F v J.P.M.F (22/22113)

N.H.F v J.P.M.F (22/22113) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1396 (30 November 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

22/22113

Judge

SC Mia

Rule 43 interim relief in a pending divorce: the court refused spousal maintenance, ordered child maintenance, and set supervised contact for the father.

• Interim Maintenance
• Parental Responsibility
• Contact Rights
• Rule 43 Application
• Primary Residence
• Supervised Contact

C.D.N v M.D.N (093505/2023)

C.D.N v M.D.N (093505/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1885 (7 November 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

093505/2023

Judge

Marumoagae AJ

The court granted the father interim care and residency of two children, with supervised alternate-weekend contact for the mother, pending investigations.

• Children S Act
• Interim Care And Residency
• Voice Of The Child
• Urgent Application
• Parental Responsibilities
• Supervised Contact

Y.M v T.J.M (26526/2022)

Y.M v T.J.M (26526/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 582 (13 July 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

26526/2022

Judge

Mncube

The court found the applicant had established a genuine need for interim maintenance, as evidenced by her financial shortfall and reliance on her parents. The respondent's claims of limited means were found improbable given his lifestyle and access to family assets. The applicant's maintenance requirements were deemed reasonable and reflective of the standard of living during the marriage. The respondent was ordered to pay R42,600 per month, cover school and medical expenses, and provide a suitable motor vehicle. Supervised contact was ordered in the best interests of the minor children, pend…

Source excerpt

• Rule 43 Interim Maintenance
• Parental Responsibilities And Rights
• Contribution Towards Legal Costs
• Children S Act
• Supervised Contact
• Maintenance Pendente Lite