06/01/2026 Bertus Preller Abduction, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Family law international travel, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Holiday Travel, International relocation, International Travel, International travel with minors, Relocation, Section 26B Citizenship Act, South African passport requirements best interests of child, citizenship offences major citizens, court authorization travel minors, custody international relocation, Da Silva Salie J, Department of Home Affairs, dispensing parental consent, divorce order contact rights, Family Advocate investigation, family law international travel, family law practitioners South Africa, immigration compliance minor children, international travel with minors, minor child travel authorization, parental rights international travel, passport non-compliance consequences, passport renewal minor child, section 26B Citizenship Act, section 28(2) Constitution, sibling relationships contact disputes, South African passport requirements, travel safeguards return flights, upper guardian powers, Western Cape High Court Section 26B Citizenship Act Does Not Apply to Minors: A.T.A v L.A.A (2025/246332) [2025] ZAWCHC 597 (19 December 2025) Clarifies International Travel Authorisation. Introduction The Western Cape High Court recently delivered an important judgment clarifying the application of passport and citizenship requirements to minor children travelling internationally. In A.T.A v L.A.A (2025/246332) ZAWCHC… READ MORE
22/11/2025 Bertus Preller Animus manendi, Clearly foreseen contingency, Contingencies domicile, Divorce, Divorce jurisdiction, Divorce proceedings jurisdiction, Domicile, Domicile Act 3 of 1992, Domicile of choice, Domicile of origin, Foreseeable contingency, Indefinite period, Intention to settle indefinitely, International relocation, Pollak test, Procedure, Reasonably anticipated contingency, Section 1(2) Domicile Act, Section 2(1)(a) Divorce Act 70 of 1979, Special plea in abatement, Vague possibility animus manendi, Chinatex v Erskine, clearly foreseen contingency, contingencies domicile, divorce jurisdiction, Domicile Act 3 of 1992, domicile of choice, domicile of origin, Eilon v Eilon, Family Law, foreseeable contingency, indefinite period, intention to settle indefinitely, International Relocation, IRC v Bullock, marital breakdown, matrimonial jurisdiction, OB v LBDS, onus of proof domicile, Pollak test, Re Fuld, reasonably anticipated contingency, section 1(2) Domicile Act, section 2(1)(a) Divorce Act 70 of 1979, special plea in abatement, trial period, vague possibility, Western Cape High Court When a “Trial Period” Defeats Domicile: Animus Manendi and Foreseeable Contingencies in M.S.S v R.A (2025/0539959) [2025] ZAWCHC 517 (10 November 2025). The Facts: From Cape Town to the Netherlands and Back Again The plaintiff and defendant met in the Western Cape in 2016. Their relationship progressed quickly, with the couple moving… READ MORE