Nengomasha v Robbins (117 of 2024) [2024] ZWHHC 117 (21 March 2024)

Nengomasha v Robbins (117 of 2024) [2024] ZWHHC 117 (21 March 2024)

The applicant failed to show valid reasons to further limit the respondent’s access rights. The child’s best interests require a meaningful relationship with both parents, and the respondent’s access should not be unduly restricted. The acrimony between the parties is not a sufficient basis to limit access.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] ZWHHC 117
Parties
Applicant: Elleta Nengomasha; Respondent: Ngoni Alex Robbins
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
21 March 2024
Case Number
117 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Opposed Court Application / Judgment
Outcome
application partially granted
Legal Topics
Custody, Access, Variation of Custody Order, Best Interests of the Child
Source Language
english
Family Law Child Law Custody Access Variation of Custody Order Best Interests of the Child

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elleta Nengomasha

Applicant

Ngoni Alex Robbins

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Opposed Court Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the custody and access order should be varied after the child turned six years old
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause to limit the respondent's access rights
  3. 3 What access arrangement is in the best interests of the child

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to show valid reasons to further limit the respondent’s access rights. The child’s best interests require a meaningful relationship with both parents, and the respondent’s access should not be unduly restricted. The acrimony between the parties is not a sufficient basis to limit access.

Court Disposition

application partially granted

Orders

  • Custody of the minor child G (born 28 December 2016) awarded to the applicant until the child turns 18 years of age.
  • The respondent is to exercise access rights over the child for two full weekends every month and half the school holidays and alternate public holidays.