Three Surrogacy Applications and Others (8749/22;9353/22;34190/22), Ex parte [2022] ZAGPPHC 848 (25 October 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
8749/22;9353/22;34190/22
Judges
AP Ledwaba, E van der Schyff, I de Vos
The court held that it is not a general requirement in surrogacy applications for existing children of commissioning parents or surrogate mothers to be assessed by a clinical psychologist. Such a blanket rule would be inconsistent with the best interests of the child principle, which requires individualised, fact-based inquiry. The Children's Act and established jurisprudence provide that the emotional availability of the surrogate mother is the relevant criterion, and expert evidence confirms that mandatory psychological assessments may be harmful and are not supported by empirical research.…
MIA v State Information Technology Agency (Pty) Ltd (D312/2012) [2015] ZALCD 20; 2015 (6) SA 250 (LC); [2015] 7 BLLR 694 (LC); (2015) 36 ILJ 1905 (LC) (26 March 2015)
Court
Labour Court Durban
Case number
D312/2012
Judge
Gush
The Labour Court held that denying paid maternity leave to a commissioning parent in a surrogacy arrangement was unfair discrimination and ordered two months' salary.
Ex parte: WH and Others (29936/11) [2011] ZAGPPHC 185; 2011 (6) SA 514 (GNP); [2011] 4 All SA 630 (GNP) (27 September 2011)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
29936/11
Judges
R G Tolmay, N Kollapen
The court confirmed a surrogacy agreement, holding the same-sex commissioning parents and surrogate were suitable and that the arrangement complied with the Children’s Act.