Bosch v Van Vuuren - LexisNexis South Africa

1317 As I also sought to explain to counsel for the Respondent in thecourse of argument, the Court does not approach each matterwith a “clean slate” and on the basis that the Court has noexperience of these matters. On the contrary, the Courtconsiders each application or matter in the context of developedpractises, including the routine issue of orders of what I refer toas “the ordinary kind” – which regimes have been shown overtime to be the best that can be done in circumstances wheretheir parents do not live under one roof and thus to serve thebest interests of the children concerned. Inasmuch as counselfor the Respondent appeared to find this a somewhat startlingproposition, I emphasise that this is not a matter of the Courtadjudicating applications of this kind based on some a priorisuppositions or assumptions.On the contrary, and as I havealready explained, the Court is cognisant of the body of learningwhich exists in this regard, and is guided by its own practice andexperience derived from the many cases of this kind which servebefore it virtually on a daily basis.18 It is appropriate that I say something at this juncture about thepapers in this matter, and the manner in which the matter hasproceeded generally.As I have already indicated, theapplication was launched during February of this year. It first