A mother has forged ahead with her application in the Western Cape High Court for her husband to pay school fees to a private school in an affluent southern suburbs area, despite his willingness to pay for an alternative government school, which fees he could afford.
Protracted divorce proceedings, spanning five years, have resulted in a Cape Town couple’s two children not yet being enrolled in school this year.
The mother of the children has forged ahead with her application in the Western Cape High Court for her husband to pay school fees to a private school in an affluent southern suburbs area, despite his willingness to pay for an alternative government school, which fees he could afford.
The mother’s urgent application to make her estranged husband – or alternatively the paternal grandparents – pay for arrears at the specific school, failed in the high court.
The woman had also sought for her estranged husband to be jailed for six months if he failed to comply with the order of the court.
According to court documents “acrimonious and protracted divorce proceedings” are pending between the two due to ongoing litigation relating to the father’s alleged non-compliance with an interim maintenance order. The father argued that the interim maintenance order did not require him to pay school fees for a specific school, but only that he must pay for the children’s comprehensive education costs.
He further submitted that while he could not afford the school fees for the school that the children were attending in 2023, he was prepared to, and able to pay the school fees for a less expensive school – the annual cost of which would amount to R43 525 compared to the other school where fees would cost R270 000 per year.
Acting Judge Mushahida Adhikari said: “It was not in dispute that (the father) had arranged for the children to attend (the alternative school) and that the children had been accepted into (the alternative school), but that (the mother) refused to consent to the children moving to any school other than (the private school).”
She contended that moving the children to another school would not be in their best interests.
“It bears emphasis that no evidence was placed before me as to why moving the children to a less expensive school ... or indeed to any school other than (the private school), would not be in their best interests.
“At the hearing I expressed concern about the fact that the children were not enrolled in any school, given that the academic year had started on 17 January 2024.
“(The father’s) attorney reiterated that his client had made arrangements with (the alternative school) to accept the children for the 2024 academic year and that his client had tendered to pay the school fees.
(The mother’s) attorney reiterated that her client refused to consent to the children attending (the alternative school),” said Judge Adhikari.
The judge dismissed the mother’s application and further ordered that both parties must immediately approach the Registrar of Judge Nathan Erasmus to manage the further conduct of the divorce action.
Judge Erasmus had taken on the role of case management judge in respect of the divorce to deal with it “expeditiously”.
Cape Times