Mother wins relocation application fight

A mother has been granted permission, after an application to the Western Cape High Court, to relocate to the United Kingdom.

A mother has been granted permission, after an application to the Western Cape High Court, to relocate to the United Kingdom.

Published Oct 24, 2022

Share

Cape Town - Unable to sort out differences in co-parenting their two-year-old daughter, a mother has been granted permission, after an application to the Western Cape High Court, to relocate to the United Kingdom.

The application was opposed by the child’s father - an alleged drunkard with an abusive nature - while the mom was accused of equally destructive behaviour.

The father had opposed the application saying relocation was “not bona fide and it is in any event premature since the bond of attachment between himself and (the child) at this stage is such that it will be severed should the mother be allowed to relocate”, according to court documents.

In her judgment, Judge Judith Cloete said the papers relating to the matter and the mother’s application “are voluminous and are replete with allegations and counter-allegations”.

Judge Cloete said she arrived at her decision by focussing on the “matters that are common cause or not seriously disputed as well as the pertinent expert evidence” which included assessments by social workers and an educational psychologist specialising in the field of child forensic psychology.

A breakdown occurred in the pair’s romantic relationship which started in 2018 when the mother – who had emigrated to the UK from South Africa in 2003 when she was seven years old – secured a job at a Cape Town-based advertising agency.

“She moved into the father’s Constantia home in September 2018.

In November 2019 they acquired a restaurant business in Cape Town through a close corporation of which they became equal members, and the mother left her employment to work with the father in that business.

“From early on in their relationship the parties experienced interpersonal difficulties which became exacerbated over time, particularly after (the child’s) birth.

The mother ultimately vacated the former common home permanently on June 6 2021 when (the child) was 8 weeks old,” the judgement read.

According to the judgment, the father – diagnosed with alcohol dependency and autism spectrum disorder level 1 by two separate professionals – only had supervised visits with his daughter as “the mother and father are unable to communicate meaningfully and are locked in an ongoing, protracted array of serious disagreements about virtually everything, in particular aspects of (the child’s) care”.

However after argument, and with the intervention of their respective legal representatives, the parties agreed on a parenting plan in the event of the court granting the relocation order.

The mother’s plans to relocate were further motivated after she was offered permanent employment at a UK company where her family still lives.

In an extensive order, Judge Cloete granted the mother’s application to relocate, and granted the father rights of co-guardianship in respect of their baby and that when he does have contact visits with the child, he will be breathalysed, at his cost, until an alcohol addiction specialist has certified that the he is rehabilitated and that he no longer needs to be breathalysed.

Further, the father will have video contact with his daughter three times per week for periods up to 15 minutes which will be supervised by the mother or an adult approved of by her.

The mother is ordered to make reservations and pay the costs of the father’s airfare to London for his two visits to the child in 2023 and the costs of accommodation for a period of two weeks during the two visits that he is there while he is liable for all other costs pertaining to said visits.

“The father shall pay the costs of accommodation for any additional time that he is in the United Kingdom. From 2024 the father shall be liable for the costs of his airfares and accommodation in the United Kingdom and the applicant shall only be responsible for such costs for her visit with (the child) to South Africa at the end of each year,” judgment read.

Cape Times