A South African-born child aged 13 will next week start school in Croatia after her father won a legal battle against his estranged wife to take his daughter with him while he assists Ukrainian refugees in that country.
The child’s mother was shortly before Christmas ordered by the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg to allow the child to live with her father abroad.
Judge Shanaaz Mia ordered the mother to sign all the necessary documents relating to her daughter’s relocation. If the mother refused to sign the documents, the sheriff of the court was entitled to do so on her behalf, the order read.
Not only did the mother lose her battle for her child to remain here, but she was also instructed by the court to foot her husband’s legal bill.
Judge Mia made it clear that the interest of a child will always prevail. In this case the child made it clear she wanted to go to Croatia with her father, with whom she had a better relationship.
The judge said the court heard “the voice of the child” in this matter, as the daughter was old enough to express her wishes.
The couple met while the father worked on humanitarian and relief projects in the southern African region. The parties got married and the child was born during the marriage.
The mother stated in her opposing affidavit that her relationship with the child was strained. She noted, however, that there were efforts to improve this relationship.
According to her, the father simply wanted to take the child away in a bid to hurt her (the mother).
The father said he was due to start his new job assisting Ukrainian refugees in Croatia and he wished to return to that country, where his family resides and where his support system is based in the form of family and friends.
Having secured employment and accommodation, he was ready to depart, but the mother refused to give her consent.
Judge Mia said the Constitution was clear that decisions relating to children were paramount and must be taken having regard to their best interests.
“Where the child’s interests and an adult’s interests are not congruent, the adult’s interests must yield to what will promote the child’s best interests,” she said.
The voice of the child report and the family advocate who consulted with the child indicated that the child wished to accompany the father to Croatia. The mother is of the view that the child, being female, required a parent of the same gender to guide her as she grows older.
The family advocate indicated that the mother would have contact regularly via WhatsApp and Zoom calls. She would thus be able to maintain her relationship with the child and to advise her and counsel her on any issues required by the child.
The mother was also concerned about the child’s safety, being in an area close to the war in Ukraine. But the court said the reality of the father’s work, in the humanitarian field, is that it will always take him to where the need arises.
“The first respondent’s (mother) concern about a war being waged in parts of Europe can be assuaged by her regular contact to check in with the child. The parties have the option of returning the child to South Africa should they feel she is in danger at any point,” the judge said.
While the father may take the child with him, he has to ensure that the mother has daily contact with the child.
www.samigration.com
SA-born child leaves for Croatia with father after court rules against estranged wife
Pretoria News â€` 04 January 2023
Pretoria - A South African-born child aged 13 will next week start school in

Croatia after her father won a legal battle against his estranged wife to take his daughter with him while he assists Ukrainian refugees in that country.
The child’s mother was shortly before Christmas ordered by the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg to allow the child to live with her father abroad.
Judge Shanaaz Mia ordered the mother to sign all the necessary documents relating to her daughter’s relocation. If the mother refused to sign the documents, the sheriff of the court was entitled to do so on her behalf, the order read.
Not only did the mother lose her battle for her child to remain here, but she was also instructed by the court to foot her husband’s legal bill.
Judge Mia made it clear that the interest of a child will always prevail. In this case the child made it clear she wanted to go to Croatia with her father, with whom she had a better relationship.
The judge said the court heard “the voice of the child” in this matter, as the daughter was old enough to express her wishes.
The couple met while the father worked on humanitarian and relief projects in the southern African region. The parties got married and the child was born during the marriage.
The mother stated in her opposing affidavit that her relationship with the child was strained. She noted, however, that there were efforts to improve this relationship.
According to her, the father simply wanted to take the child away in a bid to hurt her (the mother).
The father said he was due to start his new job assisting Ukrainian refugees in Croatia and he wished to return to that country, where his family resides and where his support system is based in the form of family and friends.
Having secured employment and accommodation, he was ready to depart, but the mother refused to give her consent.
Judge Mia said the Constitution was clear that decisions relating to children were paramount and must be taken having regard to their best interests.
“Where the child’s interests and an adult’s interests are not congruent, the adult’s interests must yield to what will promote the child’s best interests,” she said.
The voice of the child report and the family advocate who consulted with the child indicated that the child wished to accompany the father to Croatia. The mother is of the view that the child, being female, required a parent of the same gender to guide her as she grows older.
The family advocate indicated that the mother would have contact regularly via WhatsApp and Zoom calls. She would thus be able to maintain her relationship with the child and to advise her and counsel her on any issues required by the child.
The mother was also concerned about the child’s safety, being in an area close to the war in Ukraine. But the court said the reality of the father’s work, in the humanitarian field, is that it will always take him to where the need arises.
“The first respondent’s (mother) concern about a war being waged in parts of Europe can be assuaged by her regular contact to check in with the child. The parties have the option of returning the child to South Africa should they feel she is in danger at any point,” the judge said.
While the father may take the child with him, he has to ensure that the mother has daily contact with the child.
www.samigration.com V.4645

One of the highlighted topics: Critical Skills Visa.

- Key Insight: Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast track to working in South Afr...
- This matter relates to critical skills visa and its broader implications.
- Individuals are advised to seek professional guidance.

Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast trac V.6139
Click here for full article

One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, became a victim of identity theft in 2012 when fraudulent transactions occurred, using her personal details.

-The Pretoria High Court found that the department of home affairs had violated constitutional rights without due process.
-Only half of Lawyers for Human Rights` test group has been unblocked, while 385 000 identities remain blocked nationwide.
-LHR appeals extension, urges affected people to seek help now.

Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) are intensifying pressure on the department of home affairs over the national ID-blocking crisis, accusing the state of acting too slowly to unblock qualifying individuals despite a landmark court ruling.

In January last year, the Pretoria High Court found that the department`s practice of blocking IDs without due process was unlawful and unconstitutional. One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, a Swati citizen and South African permanent resident since 1998, fell victim to identity theft in 2012 when fraudsters used her personal details.

 V.6133
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6128
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6129
Click here for full article

A Washington state mother and her 6-year-old son have been released after spending more than three weeks in US immigration detention due to a brief trip to Canada and a small paperwork mistake, her attorney told CNN on Saturday.

Sarah Shaw, a New Zealand citizen who has lived legally in the US since she arrived in 2021, was detained at the Blaine, Washington, Customs and Border Protection checkpoint when returning home after dropping her two oldest children off at the Vancouver airport for a flight to visit their grandparents in New Zealand. Shaw, 33, chose the flight out of Vancouver because it was direct and she didn`t want her children to have to navigate a layover alone, her attorney Minda Thorward, told CNN.

 V.6130
Click here for full article

On 22 July 2025, the Gauteng High Court dismissed Sitrusrand Boerdery`s review of the Department of Employment and Labour`s refusal to issue a Working Conditions and Salary Benchmarking Certificate, an essential precondition for obtaining corporate visas under the Immigration Act.

Acting Judge Kekana AJ held that the Department`s decision was lawful, rational and procedurally fair. This judgment illustrates how businesses can - and must - structure their corporate visa applications to meet statutory requirements, and how legal practitioners should prepare robust review challenges when administrative authorities decline to recommend foreign-work permits.

 V.6131
Click here for full article

The United States could forfeit an estimated 9.4 billion dollars in visitor spending over the next three years following the introduction of a new 250 dollars `visa integrity fee,` according to industry groups, who warn the policy risks undermining tourism and costing thousands of jobs.
The United States’ decision to introduce a 250 dollars `visa integrity fee` on international visitors has triggered sharp criticism from the global tourism industry, with officials warning that the measure could deter millions of travellers and cost the U.S. economy billions.
The 250dollar `visa integrity fee,` part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed on July 4, 2025, will take effect later this year. According to immigration law firm Envoy Global, it applies to all nonimmigrant visa holders which include students, tourists, temporary workers, and business visitors particularly from African countries. V.6132
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6127
Click here for full article

1. Right to Legal Representation•You have the right to consult with a legal representative.•Contact an immigration practitioner, legal aid clinic, or attorney urgently.•Do not sign any documents without understanding them fully. 2. Section 34 of the Immigration Act•You must be brought to court with 48 hours to confirm arrest but you can remain locked up very long as courts figure out what to do with you •If you`re found to be illegally in South Africa, you may be detained for up to 30 days (extendable by a magistrate) pending deportation.•BUT this cannot happen arbitrarily. You must be informed of your rights, and Home Affairs must follow due process.- becomes a nightmare , you could lose your job , business , place to stay V.6121
Click here for full article

Driving for Bolt, Uber, Mr D, or Checkers Sixty60?If you`re undocumented, you`re risking more than just your income.The Risks if You`re Not Legal: - Vehicle impoundment - Heavy fines - Arrest & deportation - Permanent bans from working in SA V.6122
Click here for full article