An aggrieved woman was turned down by the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, after she tried to abolish the parental rights of her father’s child. File Picture: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers
An aggrieved woman was turned down by the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, after she tried to abolish the parental rights of her child’s father.
The woman brought the application after the father refused to let their child travel to Lesotho.
The child’s age was not mentioned.
In her application, she said she wants to be the only parent authorised to apply for the child’s passport and that her consent should be made sufficient to allow the child to travel internationally.
In response, the father said he was never informed of the reason for travelling to Lesotho, and he merely sought more information regarding the details of the trip, which was not provided.
After reviewing the evidence, Judge Elmarie Van Der Schyff said it was evident that the parties have unresolved issues.
“To seek an order terminating a father’s guardianship over his biological child because he refuses to grant consent for the child to travel beyond the borders of the country is, however, to kill a fly with a sledgehammer.
“A father cannot be faulted for wanting to obtain detailed information about proposed trips that might take his child outside the country’s borders,” she said.
The judge said that if the father was unreasonable, the high court could intervene.
However, in this case, the father was entitled to detailed information about travel engagements involving his child.
“When will the child travel, for what purpose, in whose company, and for how long? These are some of the questions that come to mind. I am thus also not inclined to award the applicant (mother) the sole right to consent to the child travelling internationally,’’ added the judge.
In addition, the judge said she was concerned by the parties’ inability to communicate and parent their child without conflict.
The judge saw it fit to appoint a parent coordinator in the interest of the child.
The judge ordered each party to pay their own costs.
IOL