He was gainfully employed, made over R100 000 per month, but he left that job so he could pay less money in child maintenance.
He had been married to his wife and on 20 August 2010 in the South Gauteng High Court, a divorce decree was granted.
The court described it as an “acrimonious divorce” because there were thousands of pages that formed part of the litigation.
Two children were born of the marriage. The first-born child was four (4) years old and the second born child was five (5) months old when the parties parted ways.
The former lovers signed three settlement agreements before the dissolution of their marriage, the main Settlement Agreement dated 5 July 2009, an Addendum to Settlement Agreement, and an Acknowledge of Debt dated 18 September 2009, and a second Addendum to the Settlement Agreement dated 20 November 2009. These agreements were made an order of court on 20 August 2010.
They tried to rekindle their relationship but that did not work out. Instead, between September 2013 to December 2014, frequently appeared in the Randburg Magistrate’s court for various charges against each other.
The court heard that on 31 January 2014, the father purposefully resigned from his position as an Accountant and Chief Financial Officer at his employer.
“At the time, he earned a salary of R107 665.50 per month. Prior to his resignation, on 13 September 2013, he launched an application for a reduction in maintenance of an amount of R10 000.00 per month per child, medical aid for the applicant and minor children, private school fees and crèche fees.
“From June 2014, he contributed an amount of R3 000.00 per month per child. There were no contributions to medical aid, private school fees and related expenses. The maintenance payments that he made were said to be irregular.
Read more | Knysna love affair leads to ConCourt instructing Parliament to change legislation
“In November 2017, he contributed an amount of R3 250.00 per month per child, without any other contributions to other expenses. From November 2018 to date, he has contributed an amount of R3 500.00 per month per child without any contributions to other expenses. The Family Advocate stated in its report that there have been no maintenance contributions by the respondent since February 2023,” the court heard.
The mother relocated from Gauteng to Cape Town for employment purposes in December 2014.
After relocating to Cape Town, she consulted a mediator to intervene in their ongoing dispute. The father was requested to attend mediation regarding parental and visitation responsibilities, as well as maintenance for the minor children, but he did not participate in the mediation process.
The mother proceeded with an application for a parenting plan and on 19 November 2015 an interim parenting plan was forwarded to the father, but no response was received.
On 18 February 2016, the court heard, an interim parenting plan was made an order of court.
Having been made aware of this parenting plan, it was stated that the father failed to co-operate and or perform in terms of the parenting plan.
In 2017, it was said that the parties started communicating with each other. The father requested that he be accommodated more. He requested a mediation take place on 27 April 2017, and a Draft Parenting Plan was drawn.
Certain amendments were made including a permission by the father being granted for the application of passports and visas for the minor children to travel abroad. The father unfortunately reneged on his consent for the children to travel abroad.
“At all times, the respondent, led the applicant to believe that he had been unemployed since 2014, when in reality he was employed as the Chief Financial Officer of (another institution) since 2016. This information was acquired by the mother through a Google search. On 2 May 2017, the Draft Parenting Plan was forwarded to the father for signature, the father however elected not to sign it.”
The court heard from the mother, that as early as 2015, the father refused to co-sign for the minor children to travel overseas to the mother’s sister in the Isle of Man, United Kingdom at the mother’s sister’s costs. Following the father’s refusal, the mother proceeded with an application to the Children’s Court for the issue of the children’s passports without father’s consent. That application was granted on 20 April 2016 and the father was present at Court. On 6 July 2016 the passports were issued for both children without the father’s consent.
It was evidence before court that the first-born child was nominated to attend the Euro Soccer Tournament in England at the end of 2017. However, the venue was later relocated to Dubai. Again, the father withheld his consent despite the mother offering him to travel with the child internationally and despite offering the father to accompany the child with other parents.
Read more | Bloem court rules against man who lied about wife's involvement in divorce proceedings
In order for the child to travel to Dubai, a visa was necessary. The mother had to launch an application to the Western Cape High Court for her to obtain sole guardianship of the minor children. The sole guardianship order was granted on 23 August 2018.
“Despite this application being launched on 18 April 2018, the father alleged that he did not receive this application as he was hospitalised form approximately 5 June 2018 – 13 July 2018 (as per detailed claim statements attached). He was in a coma, and literally on his death bed. Further period is unaccounted for in the answering affidavit.”
In 2020, the mother lost her job, and she felt the pinch of not having income or support. She once again turned to the courts, asking for the settlement agreements to be made orders of the court. The father opposed the application.
In delivering the judgment, judge Babalwa Mantame said the father’s behaviour was “quite shocking”.
“When parties divorce, they somehow forget that it is the husband and wife that get divorced and not the children. The children must and should not be used as pawns to fight the battle of the parents and settle scores. This feature was very much pronounced in these proceedings. The children should not bear the brunt of the consequences of a divorce.
“It is now disconcerting and or disheartening for the father to seek interpretation of the terms and conditions of which he is fully aware, having failed, or unwilling to contribute the bare minimum to the upbringing of his offspring. I find the applicant’s conduct to be disingenuous.
“Sole guardianship and sole care of the minor children is granted to the mother. It is declared that the amount of R10 000.00 referred to in paragraph 1 of the Addendum to the Settlement Agreement dated 20 November 2009 is the amount payable by the respondent per month per child.” The maintenance for each child is to be paid until they are of self-supporting age.
Based on recommendations from the Family Advocate, the court has, among other things, ordered the father to go to parenting classes.
“The Father should participate in structured intervention with a professional skilled in Positive Parenting techniques. The course must focus on the role of the father in the family and being actively involved in raising his children.”
