11/10/2026 Bertus Preller Best Interests of the Child, Children, Parental Rights, Parental rights and responsibilities, Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013, School rugby governance, School rugby recruitment, School sport law, Schoolboy Rugby South Africa, Schoolboy rugby transfers best interests of the child section 28, Bought Not Built, Centre for Child Law v Media 24, child privacy South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, divorce school move child, family law South Africa, Information Regulator complaint, NM v Smith privacy, parental consent children’s act, parenting plan school change, POPIA administrative fine R10 million, POPIA children’s information, POPIA penalties imprisonment, Press Code children, publication of schoolboy rugby transfers, rugby blog privacy, rugby bursary school transfer, schoolboy rugby poaching, schoolboy rugby recruitment, schoolboy rugby transfer sheets, section 18 parental responsibilities and rights, section 30 co-holders, section 31 major decisions, section 34 POPIA, section 35 POPIA competent person, section 7 POPIA journalism exclusion, section 99 POPIA damages, separated parents school decision Schoolboy Rugby Transfer Sheets: What Parental Consent Means in Family Law and What POPIA Does to Blogs That Publish Without It. In a recent article for my Substack newsletter I looked at the running "transfer sheets" that some rugby websites keep of schoolboy players moving between schools, and I asked a… READ MORE
03/10/2026 Bertus Preller Alimony, Best Interests of the Child, Care and Contact, Child Maintenance, Childcare Expert, Children, Children's matters South Africa, Civil contempt South Africa, Contact Rights, Contempt of Court, Costs, Curator Ad Litem, Divorce, Forensic psychologist mandate, Hired Gun Expert, Maintenance, Parental rights and responsibilities, Pendente Lite, Primary Residence, Primary residence dispute, Rule 43, Rule 43 Applications, Rule 43 Contempt, Rule 43 orders, Unlawful retention of a child, Urgency, Urgent applications, Variation Rule 43(6) best interests of the child, breach of court order, child abuse allegations, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Contact rights, court-appointed expert, curator ad litem, divorce litigation, DTL v GB, expert bias, family advocate report, family law South Africa, forensic psychologist mandate, Gauteng High Court Johannesburg, hired gun expert, interim care and contact, parental alienation, parental rights and responsibilities, pendente lite order, primary care, primary residence, Rule 43 variation, Rule 43(6), Rule 67A(3), scale C costs, self-help, sheriff enforcement, unlawful retention of a child, Urgent Application Self-Help Never Pays: Unlawful Retention of a Child and the Limits of Rule 43(6) — L.C.E v C.E (2026/226362) [2026] ZAGPJHC 1070 (29 September 2026). Neutral Citation: E v E (2026-226362) ZAGPJHC --- (29 September 2026) The Facts: A Four-Year-Old Caught in the Crossfire of a Brutal Divorce The parties in L.C.E v C.E (2026/226362)… READ MORE
15/06/2026 Bertus Preller 1996 Hague Convention, Abducting parent defences, Abduction, Article 13 defences, Article 13(a) consent, Article 13(b) grave risk, Children, Children's Court, Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction acquiescence, Ad Hoc Central Authority, ameliorative measures, Article 12, Article 13, Article 13(a), Article 13(b), Central Authority, Chapter 17, child abduction South Africa, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Cloete J, ex post facto consent, grave risk defence, habitual residence, Hague Convention, International Child Abduction, KG v GB, Koch case, Penello, Plascon-Evans, relocation application, return order, rights of custody, Smith v Smith, Sonderup v Tondelli, undertakings, Western Cape High Court, wrongful retention Real, Positive and Unequivocal: How Ad Hoc Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another v L.C.C (2026/034707) [2026] ZAWCHC 301 (10 June 2026) Tests Consent and Grave Risk Under the Hague Convention. This judgment is a useful working illustration of how our courts now approach return applications under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, incorporated into our… READ MORE
30/03/2026 Bertus Preller Amputation minor child, Best interests of child short-term, Best Interests of the Child, Children, constitutional rights of children, Medical treatment minor child, Religious beliefs parental refusal, Section 129(9) Children's Act, Surgical intervention minor child, Traditional healing consent amputation minor child, best interests of the child, children's constitutional rights, Children’s Act 38 of 2005, Family Advocate memorandum, Hay v B, Life Health Care Group v JMS, locus standi hospital, medical treatment minor child, medically accepted alternative, meningococcal septicaemia, National Health Act 61 of 2003, Pangarker J, parental consent minor child, parental rights versus child's rights, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, religious beliefs parental refusal, section 129 Children's Act, section 129(10) Children's Act, section 129(6) Children's Act, section 129(9) Children's Act, section 28(2) Constitution, section 36 Constitution limitation of rights, surgical intervention minor child, traditional healing consent, upper guardian High Court, urgent application minor child, Western Cape High Court, ZAWCHC 150 When Faith Meets the Scalpel: How the Western Cape High Court Stepped In to Save a Six-Year-Old’s Life — Red Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital v MD and Another (2026/049305) [2026] ZAWCHC 150 (27 March 2026). The Facts: A Six-Year-Old, Gangrenous Feet and a Family's Unyielding Faith On 19 January 2026, a six-year-old girl, referred to as AD to protect her identity, was admitted to the… READ MORE
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… READ MORE
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… READ MORE
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… READ MORE
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… READ MORE
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… READ MORE
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… READ MORE