Children’s Act 38 of 2005 Archives - Family Laws South Africa

19/12/2025

Bertus Preller Adversarial Legal System, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Children's matters South Africa, Divorce, Hostile Family Lawyers, Lawyer-client alignment, Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, Litigation misconduct, LPC Code of Conduct, LPC Code of Conduct, Mediation, Parental Coordinator, Parental Rights, Rule 41A mediation notice, Zealous advocacy adversarial litigation, Alternative Dispute Resolution, attorney ethics children, best interests of child, child-centred advocacy, child-focused representation, children's matters South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, co-parenting relationships, collaborative family law, contact disputes, costs de bonis propriis, custody disputes, family law ethics, family law South Africa, family mediation mandatory, lawyer-client alignment, Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014, Legal Practice Council, LPC Code of Conduct, mediation family law, parental alienation, parental conflict, parenting responsibilities, professional conduct family lawyers, Rule 43 applications, section 6(4) Children's Act, section 7 Children's Act, Van den Berg v Le Roux, zealous advocacy

When Lawyers Become Warriors: The Dangers of Over-Identification with Clients in South African Children’s Matters.

Introduction In high conflict childcare and contact disputes, lawyers sometimes align so closely with their clients’ positions that they become virtual proxies for parental animosity. This “over-identification” with clients, even…

22/11/2025

Bertus Preller Balance of probabilities, Children, Court-ordered DNA testing, DNA evidence admissibility, DNA testing, Documentary evidence principles, Expert evidence requirements, Genetic testing reliability, Paternity confirmation, Paternity Disputes, Paternity Fraud, Paternity presumptions, Probative value of documents, SANAS guidelines, Scientific certainty standards authenticity of documents, balance of probabilities, buttressing oral evidence, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Civil Proceedings Evidence Act 25 of 1965, contemporaneous documentary evidence, court-ordered DNA testing, cross-examination requirements, cumulative evidence assessment, DNA evidence admissibility, documentary evidence principles, evidence law principles, expert evidence requirements, expert opinion evidence, family law South Africa, genetic testing reliability, Maintenance Act 99 of 1998, maintenance court proceedings, maintenance enquiries, Mayer v Williams, paternity disputes, paternity presumptions, prima facie evidence, probative value of documents, SANAS guidelines, scientific certainty standards, unrepresented litigants, viva voce testimony, Western Cape High Court

When DNA Evidence Speaks Without Experts: Probabilities, Paternity and Documentary Evidence in E.A.P v S.W (A115/2025) [2025] ZAWCHC 540 (20 November 2025).

Factual Background: A Protracted Paternity Dispute Spanning Two Decades This appeal concerned a finding by the Cape Town Magistrate's Court, sitting as a maintenance court, that the appellant was the…

01/11/2025

Bertus Preller Abuse, Best Interests of the Child, Children, Conduct of Childcare Experts, Interlocutory applications, Motion proceedings, Parental Alienation, Parental Rights, Plascon Evans Rule, Procedural Law, Procedure, Referral to trial, Rule 6(5)(g), Sexual Abuse, Sexual Abuse Allegations abuse of process, child contact disputes, Children's Best Interests, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, coaching of child, court as upper guardian, credibility assessment, custody and access, Dispute of Fact, expert evidence family law, expert witness requirements, family advocate report, forensic psychologist report, interlocutory applications, judicial investigation children, motion proceedings, onus of proof family law, Parental Rights, Plascon-Evans rule, referral to trial, room hire principle, Rule 6(5)(g), section 28 best interests, sexual abuse allegations, shared parenting arrangements, South African Family Law, supervised contact, suspension of contact rights, unsubstantiated allegations

Unproven Abuse Allegations and Expert Evidence: When Courts Reject Referral to Trial in Child Contact Disputes – C.N v I.G.R (D6383/2024) [2025] ZAKZDHC 68 (28 October 2025).

The Factual Matrix: Allegations of Sexual Abuse and Protracted Litigation The case of C.N v I.G.R (D6383/2024) ZAKZDHC 68 (28 October 2025) presents a troubling factual scenario that will resonate…

25/08/2025

Bertus Preller Children, High Court exclusive jurisdiction, Interdict, Leave to appeal Superior Courts Act, Lis alibi pendens family law, Procedural Law, Procedure, Relocation, Urgency, Urgent applications appellate review discretion, best interests child principle, child relocation South Africa, Children's Court powers, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, compelling reasons appeal, constitutional children's rights, cross-border child disputes, custody relocation assessment, expert assessment relocation, family law jurisdiction, final interdict requirements, High Court exclusive jurisdiction, international child removal, leave to appeal Superior Courts Act, lis alibi pendens family law, non-joinder expert witness, parental cooperation relocation, reasonable prospects success, section 17 Superior Courts Act, Section 28 Constitution, statutory interpretation children's legislation, upper guardian role, urgency child matters, Western Cape High Court

High Court Jurisdiction Over Child Relocation Upheld: N.T.R-F v J.A.L (Leave to Appeal) (2025/076576) [2025] ZAWCHC 377 (18 August 2025) – Expert Assessment Requirements and Appellate Prospects.

Factual Matrix: Relocation Assessment and Parental Cooperation in Cross-Border Child Relocation The factual foundation of this Western Cape High Court decision reveals the complex procedural and substantive challenges inherent in…

27/07/2025

Bertus Preller Artificial fertilisation, Artificial insemination, Children, Children's Court, Gamete donation, Gamete donor agreement, IVF disputes, Parental Rights, Paternity confirmation, Section 40(3) Children's Act, Sperm donor, Surrogacy artificial fertilisation, artificial insemination, AV v DC case, best interests of children, biological father, child support, child welfare, children's rights, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, declaratory relief, discretionary relief, Family Law, gamete donation, gamete donor agreement, intimate relationships, IVF disputes, maintenance obligations, paramountcy principle, Parental Duties, Parental Responsibilities, paternal rights, QG v CS case, reproductive law, reproductive technology, Section 40(3) Children's Act, sperm donor, Superior Courts Act, upper guardian, Von Ludwig AJ

When Sperm Donation Meets Parental Duty: V.R.N v B.L.S (2024/058240) [2025] ZAGPJHC 701 (18 July 2025) – Court Rejects Biological Father’s Escape from Responsibility.

The Facts: When Romantic Relationships Complicate Gamete Donation Arrangements The factual matrix in this case illustrates precisely why clear, formal agreements are essential in artificial fertilisation arrangements, particularly where the…

13/07/2025

Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Child protection, Children, Children's Court, Conduct of Childcare Experts, constitutional rights of children, Family reunification, Foster care, Grandparents Rights, Kinship care, Parental Rights, Procedural Law, Section 28 Constitution 4 July 2025, best interests of the child South Africa, Cape Town High Court, care and contact orders, child custody South Africa, child protection, child removal South Africa, child witness protection, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Children’s Court appeal, constitutional rights of children, Dr Astrid Martalas, ex parte court orders, family law South Africa, family reunification judgment, foster care legal challenge, High Court appeal 2025, kinship care, legal precedent family law, legal safeguards in child care, Magistrate Sipoyo judgment, no-contact order South Africa, Parental Rights, procedural fairness South Africa, psychological harm attachment, Rule of Law family matters, S.E.T and Others v Department of Justice, Section 28 Constitution, ZAWCHC 282

“Torn Apart Without Cause”: High Court Slams Children’s Court in S.E.T and Others v Department of Justice and Another (A83/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 282 (4 July 2025).

The Factual Matrix: Arrests, Allegations and the Path to Atlantis Court This matter originated in deeply troubling circumstances involving two minor children, a six-year-old girl (X) and a one-year-old boy…

16/06/2025

Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Guardianship, Parental Rights Acting Judge Van Niekerk, alternative remedies family disputes, best interests child principle, child welfare protection, child-centric legal decisions, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, constitutional children's rights, current evidence requirement, evidentiary threshold family law, family law jurisprudence, forensic evaluation children, guardianship rights suspension, High Court Gauteng Division, legal practitioners guidance, logistical challenges custody, parental cooperation disputes, parental guardianship termination, parental responsibilities termination, passport application disputes, play therapy authorization, procedural delays parental rights, proportionality termination relief, reasonableness standard parental conduct, Section 28 parental rights, South African Family Law, stale evidence family court, temporal relevance custody matters, unopposed family applications

When Good Intentions Meet Legal Reality: Y.T.B v J.F.B [2025] ZAGPPHC 494 (16 May 2025) – High Court Rejects Termination of Parental Rights Over Stale Cooperation Complaints.

Summary The High Court's decision in Y.T.B v J.F.B represents a significant affirmation of the stringent evidentiary requirements for terminating parental guardianship rights under the Children's Act. The judgment underscores…

15/06/2025

Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Children's Court, Costs, Holiday Travel, Parental Rights, Procedure, Reunification, Temporary Safe Care AC Cilliers Law of Costs, best interests principle, biological father access, child access rights, child custody disputes, children's court authority, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Christmas access disputes, costs in family matters, D.G.S.F v M.F case, emotional psychological problems children, family law South Africa, foster care arrangements, Free State High Court, gradual reunification, High Court jurisdiction, leave of absence children, legal costs children matters, magistrate's court jurisdiction, procedural failures, reunification process, section 168 Children's Act, section 187 Children's Act, section 46 Children's Act, social worker reports, temporary safe care, upper guardianship powers, urgent applications, Van Zyl J

Father’s Festive Season Bid Fails: High Court Lacks Jurisdiction in Children’s Court Matters – JHG v GWH and Another (7147/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 133 (7 May 2025).

Case Overview: JHG v GWH and Another In the matter of JHG v GWH and Another (7147/2024) ZAFSHC 133 (7 May 2025), the High Court of South Africa, Free State…

10/06/2025

Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Conduct of Childcare Experts, Divorce, Guardianship, International Travel, Maintenance, Muslim Marriages, Parental Coordinator, Parental Rights, Procedural Law, Relocation best interests of child, child psychology relocation, child relocation South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, constitutional family law, contact arrangements international, cross-border parenting, custodial parent rights, divorce relocation orders, expert witness family law, F v F constitutional rights, Family Advocate reports, family law South Africa, freedom of movement parents, gender discrimination family law, gender equality family court, international custody disputes, international relocation disputes, Jackson v Jackson precedent, KwaZulu-Natal High Court, maintenance obligations relocation, mirror orders international, non-custodial parent contact, parental alienation allegations, parental consent relocation, passport consent children, Portugal relocation case, primary caregiver rights, visa requirements minors

Breaking the Shackles: How W.S v N.V (D376/2020; D1062/2021) [2025] ZAKZDHC 35 (6 June 2025) Transformed South African Child Relocation Law and Gender Rights.

The Facts: A Family Torn Between Two Continents This case presents a deeply personal yet legally complex dispute that unfolded over several years, illustrating the profound challenges faced by divorced…

17/03/2025

Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Conduct of Childcare Experts, Costs, Guardianship, Relocation 2025 ZAKZPHC 26, best interests of the child, Child Relocation, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, consent order rejection, Contact rights, court discretion, custody dispute, D.R.R v S.D.R, expert evidence, F v F, Family Advocate, Family Law, High Court South Africa, Johannesburg vs Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal Division, legal precedent, Mossop J, parental alienation, Parental Rights, primary care, psychological reports, sibling separation, sibling unity, South African Law, Terblanche v Terblanche, upper guardian, Van der Linde case, ZDE v CE

Divided No More: Sibling Unity Triumphs in D.R.R v S.D.R and Another (8947/2022P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 26 (13 March 2025).

Background of the Family Dispute In the matter of D.R.R v S.D.R and Another (8947/2022P) ZAKZPHC 26 (13 March 2025), heard in the High Court of South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal Division,…

Tag: Children’s Act 38 of 2005