Bosch v Van Vuuren - LexisNexis South Africa

12in Mrs Swanepoel’s report, he should not be taken to have madeout a case for contact with R – save, as I have said, on arestricted and supervised basis.16 For reasons which will become apparent, I do not consider thatto be the correct approach. Indeed, if it were so, then it seemsthat no father would be able to establish a claim for contact withhis children absent a positive report from a psychologistendorsing, inter alia, his morality and parenting skills in any casewhere matters of that kind are put in issue. That is however notthe practise of our Courts.On the contrary, the Court isconstrained to make a finding based on the available evidence –which may or may not include evidence of an expert kind.Indeed, and as I sought to explain to counsel for the Respondentduring the course of argument, the Court relies heavily on itsown experience in similar matters and moreover moves from theposition that a child’s best interests are, save in very exceptionalcircumstances, best served by frequent and regular contact withboth parents conducive to forming close and appropriaterelationships with both of them.This is, as I have alreadyindicated, consistent with the general body of learning on thesubject. It is also this Court’s own experience.