A disgruntled Limpopo woman sought relief in the high court to have her estranged husband sent to prison for 30 days after he enrolled their five-year-old daughter in a school without her consent.

The mother, who is a teacher, got a job in Ermelo, Mpumalanga and moved out of their home in Musina, Limpopo.

Prior to the move, she instituted divorce proceedings against the husband.

Her husband, unhappy with her relocation, responded by filing an urgent application in December 2024, seeking to prevent her from taking their daughter to Ermelo and requesting primary residence of the child.

The Limpopo High Court temporarily decided that for ten days after the mother vacated their home, the child would reside with her, followed by ten days with the father, pending a social worker’s report to determine the child’s best interests.

The report was handed in before January 3, 2025.

On January 1, a social worker delivered an interim report where she indicated that a forensic investigation was needed in respect to the primary residence of child due to multiple concerns raised by both parties, and the high-risk factors identified by the social worker in both parties’ profiles.

Therefore, the social worker could not make any recommendations regarding the best interest of the minor child, referring the matter back to the judge.

Following the development, on January 13, 2025, the father failed to return the child after enrolling her at a school in Musina where she's doing Grade R.

Disenchanted, the mother brought an application seeking an order committing the father to prison for 30 days for contempt of court.

The father opposed the application and argued that the relief the mother was seeking was not in the best interest of the child.

Moreover, he said the interim order was only in place until January 10.

He said the child should be allowed to remain in school until the matter has been resolved. He asked the court to grant the mother visits every alternative weekend from Friday after school until Sunday provided that she will not remove the child from the current school.

Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.

Judge Maake Kganyago noted that even though the father acted unilaterally, he acted in good faith and his actions were not unreasonable.

Kganyago said it was impractical for the parents to continue with the order directing them to rotate the child every 10 days and it was important to find a permanent solution.

He added that it was worth noting that even though the interim report was unable to make any recommendation regarding the best interest of the child, it was mentioned that the child was comfortable to live with both parents without having preference of one over the other.

"Since the minor child has been living with the respondent (father), and it does not seem that the respondent is not taking good care of the minor child...She is schooling in a school that has been identified by both parents.

"For about two months the minor child has been with the respondent, there is no complaint about how the respondent is taking care of the minor child. In my view, it is in the best interest of the minor child if the status quo remains the same. This is just a temporary arrangement, unless the parties wanted to unnecessarily drag the matter," he said.

Judge Kganyago dismissed the application and said the mother can have access to the child every alternative weekend from Friday after school until Sunday 5pm.

He said the mother was also entitled to daily telephonic contact.

sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za

IOL News

Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.