Bosch v Van Vuuren - LexisNexis South Africa

2940.5 He was willing to allow R to take his name and remains sowilling.40.6 He has not only maintained contact with R, but has alsosought to extend the extent of contact between him andher – to the extent of launching and prosecuting thisapplication.40.7 He has paid maintenance for and continues to paymaintenance for R – the amount at the time of the hearingof this matter being R9 000, 00 per month.41 In the circumstances, it is clear to me that the requirements ofSection 21 of the Act are fulfilled, and that the Applicant isaccordingly entitled to be declared the holder of full parentalresponsibilities and rights in respect of R.42 As I have already indicated, the main thrust of the Respondent’sopposition in this regard was to the effect that the Applicantlacks the necessary moral compass and skills in order to be ableto contribute meaningfully to R’s upbringing. The argument wasaccordingly to the effect that the requirements of Section21(1)(b)(ii) were not fulfilled. The argument was, with respectto counsel, an absurd one. As I indicated during the course of