How to Appeal to the Constitutional Court – Advocate Muhammad Abduroaf

Posted on by Telelaw

How to Appeal to the Constitutional Court – Advocate Muhammad Abduroaf

Related Post

Top tips and tricks from a Senior Family Law Advocate on claiming maintenance for a five-year-old child in Phalaborwa.

Child Maintenance is the right of the child, and not that of the parent. It is also not a privilege granted to parents who must pay it. It is their duty to pay child maintenance and support their children. Once the child is self-supporting (being able to care for him or herself), the obligation falls away. This can happen when the child is 18, 20, or even 30. It all depends on the circumstances of the case.

Claiming child maintenance for your child in Phalaborwa

Whether you claim child maintenance in Phalaborwa, or any other city in South Africa, the procedures would be the same. There are however two (2) courts that can deal with child maintenance matters. That is a divorce court, in a divorce matter, and a Child Maintenance Court. For this article, we will focus on claiming maintenance in a Maintenance Court matter in Phalaborwa.

The maintenance scenario – Phalaborwa South Africa

In this article, we will deal with the following fictitious scenario, in a child maintenance matter:

  1. The Child is seven years old and attends school in Phalaborwa
  2. The child is cared for by the mother who works in Phalaborwa
  3. The mother works and earns a Salary of R 10 000
  4. The father sees the child every second weekend. He also lives and works in Phalaborwa
  5. The child’s monthly expenses are R 6000 – 00 which includes food, clothing, accommodation, education, travel etc.
  6. The father earns a reasonable salary and can afford the R 20 000 – 00 per month
  7. The mother claims R 4 000 – 00 maintenance as the father earns double her salary

What is the first step the mother must take in claiming child maintenance?

The first thing the mother must do is work out exactly what the child costs by item. She breaks down the minor child’s living expenses, starting from rent or accommodation to groceries to school fees etc. Once she has done that, she would need to determine what exactly does the minor child cost per month, seeing that she will be asking the father to contribute towards that. As best as possible, she needs to collect proof of expenses. This can be in the form of receipts.

How does she start the legal process?

The mother now needs to approach the maintenance court in the area where she lives or works to lodge a complaint for child maintenance. If she lives or works in Phalaborwa, it would be the maintenance court in Phalaborwa. She will complete a Form A wherein she will provide all the expenses for her and the minor child. She would also have to stipulate her income. Once she completed the form and submitted it to the maintenance court, she must then follow the next step.

What do you do while waiting for the maintenance court date?

While you wait to be informed of the court date by the Maintenance Court of Phalaborwa, and up until the actual first court date, you need to ensure that you keep a record of all income and expenses for you and the child. This is very important as the court allocates maintenance based on recent income and expenses.

What happens at the first court appearance at the Phalaborwa Maintenance Court?

Once you have been notified of the maintenance court date by the Phalaborwa Maintenance Court, you need to ensure that you attend it. On that day, both you and the father of the child would appear before a maintenance officer. The maintenance officer would go through both your income and expenses as well as that of the father. If all the relevant information is not before the maintenance court, then the matter may be postponed in order for the parties to submit it.

The maintenance officer will try to settle the matter and have the parents come to an agreement regarding the amount of child maintenance to be paid. If they cannot come to an agreement regarding the child maintenance to be paid, the matter would have to proceed to a formal hearing or trial before a Magistrate.

How does the Maintenance Court hearing or trial work in Phalaborwa?

Essentially, the maintenance court is called upon to make a fair ruling regarding what is a fair amount of child support that needs to be paid. For that to happen, the parents would have to give evidence in that regard. The mother would present to the court what the child costs, what she contributes and what she requires the other parent to pay. The Father would have a right to question the mother and to present evidence as to why he cannot afford the amount requested or why he feels it is an unfair amount. The mother can they also question him.

At the end of the day, the Phalaborwa Maintenance Court would be able to properly determine what is a fair and adequate amount of child maintenance to pay after being presented will all relevant information. The Phalaborwa Maintenance Court should play an active role in determining what is a fair amount of child maintenance the father should pay.

The above child maintenance application principles should apply to the following provinces and cities:

Eastern Cape:

Alice, Butterworth, East London, Graaff-Reinet, Grahamstown, King William’s Town, Mthatha

Port Elizabeth, Queenstown, Uitenhage, Zwelitsha

Free State:

Bethlehem. Bloemfontein, Jagersfontein, Kroonstad, Odendaalsrus, Parys, Phuthaditjhaba, Sasolburg, Virginia, Welkom

Gauteng:

Benoni, Boksburg, Brakpan, Carletonville, Germiston, Johannesburg, Krugersdorp, Pretoria, Randburg, Randfontein, Roodepoort, Soweto, Springs, Vanderbijlpark, Vereeniging

KwaZulu-Natal:

Durban, Empangeni, Ladysmith, Newcastle, Pietermaritzburg, Pinetown, Ulundi, Umlazi

Limpopo:

Giyani, Lebowakgomo, Musina, Phalaborwa, Polokwane, Seshego, Sibasa, Thabazimbi

Mpumalanga:

Emalahleni, Nelspruit, Secunda, North West, Klerksdorp, Mahikeng, Mmabatho, Potchefstroom, Rustenburg, Northern Cape, Kimberley, Kuruman, Port Nolloth

Western Cape:

Bellville, Phalaborwa, Constantia, George, Hopefield, Oudtshoorn, Paarl, Simon’s Town, Stellenbosch, Swellendam, Worcester

 

 

 

Posted on by Telelaw

30 May 2020 – Latest Regulations on the movement of minor children during the lockdown – The introduction of the Magistrate’s Permit

The Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Dr Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma, published new regulations regarding the Lockdown on 29 April 2020. As from 1 May 2020, South Africa’s lockdown would be on Level 4, one level down from when it started. The new regulations bring challenging changes regarding the movement of children between parents. For example, the provision of applying for a Magistrate’s permit. Therefore, some of the new regulations are welcomed by us, and others not. The regulations are further below. Click here to read an article regarding the previous regulations on the movement of children. Summary of the recent regulations that will come in effect tomorrow 1 May 2020:

Local movement of children during the lockdown

Movement of Children may only take place in the same metropolitan area or district municipality if the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver is: (a) in possession of a Court Order; or (b) a parental responsibilities and rights agreement or parenting plan, registered with the family advocate; or (c) a permit issued by a magistrate which corresponds with Form 3 of Annexure A if the latter documentation is not available; and (d) The household to which the child has to move must be free of COVID-19. Before a magistrate may issue a permit, he or she must be provided with a birth certificate or certified copy of a birth certificate of the child or children to prove a legitimate relationship between the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights. Furthermore, written reasons as to why the movement of the child is necessary must be provided. In our view, the permit application is a step back. This we say as previously there was no need for the application for a permit. The courts would be inundated with such applications. Producing a birth certificate as previously required should have continued.

Inter-Provincial movement of children during the National lockdown

The regulations now allow for a once-off movement of children between provinces during the lockdown. It states: “Any child who was not at the residence of their primary caregiver before the lockdown period and who could not travel between provinces, metropolitan and district areas during the lockdown will be permitted, on a once-off basis, to return to the residence of their primary caregiver if the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver is in possession of a permit issued by a magistrate which corresponds with Form 3 of annexure A.” Before a magistrate issues a permit, he or she must be provided with: (a) a court order; or (b) a parental responsibilities and rights agreement or parenting plan registered with the family advocate; or (c) a birth certificate or certified copy of a birth certificate of the child or children to prove a legitimate relationship between the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights, and (d) written reasons why the movement of the child is necessary. Furthermore, the household to which the child has to move must be free of COVID-19. Click here to read an article regarding the previous regulations on the movement of children. Below are the relevant regulations and the relevant form the Magistrate must provide. Movement of children
  1. (1) The movement of children between co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver, as defined in section 1(1) of the Children’s Act, 2005 (Act No. 38 of 2005), in the same metropolitan area or district municipality is allowed subject to the following if the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver is in possession of—
(a) a court order; or (b) a parental responsibilities and rights agreement or parenting plan, registered with the family advocate (c) a permit issued by a magistrate where which corresponds with Form 3 of Annexure A if the documentation in paragraphs (a) and (b) is not available. (2) The movement of children between co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver, as defined in section 1(1) of the Children’s Act, 2005 (Act No. 38 of 2005), between different metropolitan areas, district municipalities or provinces is allowed if the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver is in possession of a permit, issued by a magistrate which corresponds with Form 3 of Annexure A. (3) Any child who was not at the residence of their primary caregiver before the lockdown period and who could not travel between provinces, metropolitan and district areas during the lockdown will be permitted, on a once-off basis, to return to the residence of their primary caregiver if the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights or a caregiver is in possession of a permit issued by a magistrate which corresponds with Form 3 of annexure A. (4) The household to which the child has to move, must be free of COVID-19. (5) (a) Before a magistrate issues a permit referred to in regulation 17(1)(c), he or she must be provided with— (i) birth certificate or certified copy of a birth certificate of the child or children to prove a legitimate relationship between the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights; and (ii) written reasons why the movement of the child is necessary.   (b) Before a magistrate issues a permit referred to in 17(2) or (3), he or she must be provided with— (i) A court order (ii) a parental responsibilities and rights agreement or parenting plan registered with the family advocate or (iii) a birth certificate or certified copy of a birth certificate of the child or children to prove a legitimate relationship between the co-holders of parental responsibilities and rights; and (iv) written reasons why the movement of the child is necessary.
[caption id="attachment_9098" align="alignleft" width="651"]Permit issued by a Magistrate for the movement of children during the lockdown Permit issued by a Magistrate for the movement of children during the lockdown[/caption]                                           We are certain that you found the above article useful and interesting. Please consider sharing it on the share buttons below. They include Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, WhatsApp, Gmail and more. Someone may find it useful as well. Should you require business advice or services, feel free to click on these links: Business SA | Private Legal | Envirolaws Click here to read an article regarding the previous regulations on the movement of children.  
Posted on by Telelaw

What is the Status of Muslim Marriage in South Africa?

Women’s Legal Centre Trust v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT 24/21) [2022] ZACC 23; 2022 (5) SA 323 (CC); 2023 (1) BCLR 80 (CC) (28 June 2022)

In the case of Women’s Legal Centre Trust v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT 24/21) [2022] ZACC 23; 2022 (5) SA 323 (CC); 2023 (1) BCLR 80 (CC) (28 June 2022), the Constitutional Court deal with an issue relating to Muslim Marriage. The parties in the case where the following:

WOMEN’S LEGAL CENTRE TRUST                                              Applicant

and

PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA                First Respondent

MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL

DEVELOPMENT                                                                            Second Respondent

MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS                                                    Third Respondent

SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY                                 Fourth Respondent

CHAIRPERSON OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL

OF PROVINCES                                                                             Fifth Respondent

SOUTH AFRICAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION                     Sixth Respondent

COMMISSION FOR THE PROMOTION AND PROTECTION

OF THE RIGHTS OF CULTURAL, RELIGIOUS

AND LINGUISTIC COMMUNITIES                                                Seventh Respondent

LAJNATUN NISAA-IL MUSLIMAAT (ASSOCIATION

OF MUSLIM WOMEN OF SOUTH AFRICA)                                 Eighth Respondent

and

COMMISSION FOR GENDER EQUALITY                                   Intervening Party

and

MUSLIM ASSEMBLY CAPE                                                         First Amicus Curiae

UNITED ULAMA COUNCIL OF SOUTH AFRICA                        Second Amicus Curiae

The Constitutional Court gave the following ruling:

“On application for confirmation of an order of constitutional invalidity granted by the Supreme Court of Appeal: 1. The Supreme Court of Appeal’s order of constitutional invalidity is confirmed: 1.1. The Marriage Act 25 of 1961 (Marriage Act) and the Divorce Act 70 of 1979 (Divorce Act) are declared to be inconsistent with sections 9, 10, 28 and 34 of the Constitution in that they fail to recognise marriages solemnised in accordance with Sharia law (Muslim marriages) which have not been registered as civil marriages, as valid marriages for all purposes in South Africa, and to regulate the consequences of such recognition. 1.2. It is declared that section 6 of the Divorce Act is inconsistent with sections 9, 10, 28(2) and 34 of the Constitution, insofar as it fails to provide for mechanisms to safeguard the welfare of minor or dependent children born of Muslim marriages, at the time of dissolution of the Muslim marriage in the same or similar manner as it provides for mechanisms to safeguard the welfare of minor or dependent children born of other marriages that are dissolved. 1.3. It is declared that section 7(3) of the Divorce Act is inconsistent with sections 9, 10, and 34 of the Constitution, insofar as it fails to provide for the redistribution of assets, on the dissolution of a Muslim marriage, when such redistribution would be just. 1.4. It is declared that section 9(1) of the Divorce Act is inconsistent with sections 9, 10 and 34 of the Constitution, insofar as it fails to make provision for the forfeiture of the patrimonial benefits of a Muslim marriage at the time of its dissolution in the same or similar terms as it does in respect of other marriages that are dissolved. 1.5. The common law definition of marriage is declared to be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid to the extent that it excludes Muslim marriages. 1.6. The declarations of invalidity in paragraphs 1.1 to 1.5 above are suspended for a period of 24 months to enable the President and Cabinet, together with Parliament, to remedy the foregoing defects by either amending existing legislation, or initiating and passing new legislation within 24 months, in order to ensure the recognition of Muslim marriages as valid marriages for all purposes in South Africa and to regulate the consequences arising from such recognition. 1.7. Pending the coming into force of legislation or amendments to existing legislation referred to in paragraph 1.6, it is declared that Muslim marriages subsisting at 15 December 2014, being the date when this action was instituted in the High Court, or which had been terminated in terms of Sharia law as at 15 December 2014, but in respect of which legal proceedings have been instituted and which proceedings have not been finally determined as at the date of this order, may be dissolved in accordance with the Divorce Act as follows: (a) all the provisions of the Divorce Act shall be applicable, save that all Muslim marriages shall be treated as if they are out of community of property, except where there are agreements to the contrary, and (b) the provisions of section 7(3) of Divorce Act shall apply to such a union regardless of when it was concluded. (c) In the case of a husband who is a spouse in more than one Muslim marriage, the court: (i) shall take into consideration all relevant factors, including any contract or agreement between the relevant spouses, and must make any equitable order that it deems just; and (ii) may order that any person who in the court’s opinion has a sufficient interest in the matter be joined in the proceedings. 1.8. Pending the coming into force of legislation or amendments to existing legislation referred to in paragraph 1.6, it is declared that, from the date of this order, section 12(2) of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005 applies to a prospective spouse in a Muslim marriage concluded after the date of this order. 1.9. Pending the coming into force of legislation or amendments to existing legislation referred to in paragraph 1.6, for the purpose of paragraph 1.8 above, the provisions of sections 3(1)(a), 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(b), 3(4)(a) and 3(4)(b), and 3(5) of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998 shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to Muslim marriages. 1.10. If administrative or practical problems arise in the implementation of this order, any interested person may approach this Court for a variation of this order. 1.11. The Department of Home Affairs and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development shall publish a summary of the orders in paragraphs 1.1 to 1.10 above widely in newspapers and on radio stations, whichever is feasible, without delay. 2. The conditional cross appeal by the Women’s Legal Centre Trust, and the appeals by the South African Human Rights Commission and Commission for Gender Equality are dismissed. 3. The President and the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development must pay the Women’s Legal Centre Trust’s costs of this application, including the costs of two counsel.”

Status of Muslim Marriages in South Africa

Considering the latter judgment, Muslim Marriages are seen as valid marriages. However, the South African legal framework needs to be changed to allow for its incorporation.

Posted on by Telelaw