About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
>>
2008
>>
[2008] ZAWCHC 246
|
|
Precious v Dove (12979/2008) [2008] ZAWCHC 246 (15 August 2008)
JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(CAPE OF GOOD HOPE PROVINCIAL
DIVISION)
THIRD DIVISION
CASE NO
:
12979/2008
DATE
:
15
AUGUST 2008
In
the matter between:
SIHLE
PRECIOUS
APPLICANT
versus
SHELA
DOLVE
RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
ALLIE,
J
I
have read the papers in this matter, I have been handed the opposing
papers this morning, I have read the papers In this matter,
I have
heard counsel in this matter, extensive submissions made on behalf of
applicant. I am of the view that in relation to the
child's access to
her father Ghanna, both the applicant and the respondent have been
rather remiss in making an arrangement which
would really be in the
interests of the child and in the interests of Ghanna to have access
to the child.
I
am of the view that the child does have a right to see her father,
and it may be necessary to see her father more than once per
week
given the fragile state that he currently appears to be in. However,
I believe that the person best placed to determine how
often and for
what lengths of time the child should see the father would be the
medical doctor attending to the father, who appears
to be in an
extremely fragile state.
However,
I am not persuaded that the applicant has made out a case on these
papers as to why she should be granted the right to
visit Ghanna
Dolve and I am not even taking cognisance of the hearsay evidence
purely on the applicant's papers, it is not clear
that the applicant
has made out a case as to why she should be allowed to see Ghanna
Dolve, other than her allegation that the
child is of a young and
tender age and that allegation is countered by the opposing papers
which say that the child has had access
to the father, a sleep over
access, in the presence of the respondent previously, so the
respondent is not a complete stranger
to the child, and it is in the
respondent's home in which Ghanna currently is residing, and one
cannot make inroads into a person's
right to exercise access to his
or her property as he or she deems fit, unless it is in the interests
of. of course this instance
the child and also in the interests of
the father, so I am not granting an order that the applicant herself
has the right to visit
Ghanna Dolve, if she is granted permission to
see him that will be entirely something which the parties to outside
of the purview
of this order.
However,
it is clear that both parties, as 1 have said, have been remiss, in
not ensuring that the child has more regular contact
with the father,
given the fact that she is currently in Cape Town and usually resides
outside of Cape Town, and so bearing that
in mind, and although the
applicant is partially successful in as much as I am prepared to
grant an order authorising the child
access to the father, given the
conduct of the parties, both prior to the bringing of this
application, and at the time of the
bringing of this application, I
am only prepared to order that each party pays his or
her
own
costs.
So
my order will then be as follows;
That
the
RESPONDENT
IS ORDERED TO ALLOW THE MINOR CHILD, SITZANZELE SONYA DOLVE, THE
RIGHT TO VISIT HER BIOLOGICAL FATHER, GHANNA DOLVE
,
during all reasonable times, which reasonable times will be
determined by the medical practitioner of Ghanna Dolve, who is Dr
Bernard Zain Grevler, and that each party is ordered to pay its costs
in this matter.
ALLIE,
J