THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

MEDIA STATEMENT – CASE HEARING IN SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL
 
Ford v Ford

Supreme Court of Appeal -52/05 Hearing date: 7 November 2005
  Judgment date: 1 December 2005
Application by custodian parent of young child for leave to remove child permanently from South Africa – child strongly bonded to both parents – interests of child first and paramount consideration.

Media Summary of Judgment

From: The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal

 

Please note that the media summary is intended for the benefit of the media and does not form part of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal

 

HELEN MARGARET FORD V MICHAEL GEORGE WILLIAM FORD

 

The Supreme Court of Appeal today dismissed an appeal by a mother and custodian parent of a minor child born of her failed marriage with the respondent against a refusal of her application for leave to remove the child from South Africa in order to relocate with her to the United Kingdom. The respondent father had refused to consent to the child’s removal. The parents spend almost equal amounts of time with their daughter and share responsibility for her various needs. This shared parenting arrangement had worked well until the appellant’s decision to relocate.

The court restated that the test in matters of this nature is ‘the best interests of the child’. The court must evaluate, weigh and balance a myriad of different factors, including the child’s wishes where she is adequately mature to articulate her wishes.

The court cautioned that the refusal of such applications may impact negatively on a custodian parent’s rights to dignity, privacy and freedom of movement and result indirectly in unfair gender discrimination as women still predominantly care for children in South African society.

The court held that the appellant’s decision to relocate was ill-researched and precipitate and that, in the light of an agreed opinion of experts called by the parties that the child’s interests would be best served by remaining in South Africa, the move would be prejudicial to her emotional and psychological well-being.

It was, however, pointed out by the court that the refusal to grant the appellant leave to relocate with her daughter was not immutable and that, should the circumstances be right, she may well be in a position to obtain such leave in the not too distant future.