YCM v NDN re: LM and AM

The respondent, NDN, is the maternal grandmother of two minor boys, LM and AM, born to her deceased daughter and the appellant, YCM. After the death of the children’s mother in a motor vehicle accident in May 2022, the children remained in the care of their father, YCM, who is their legal guardian. Historically, the grandmother had maintained a relationship with the children, including periods of physical care and regular contact. After initially agreeing to allow the children to visit their grandmother, YCM unilaterally withdrew consent and cut off contact, citing personal animosity and alleged safety concerns. NDN applied to the children’s court under section 23 of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005 for an order granting her contact with the children. The children’s court granted telephonic contact, monthly visitation, and holiday contact. YCM appealed against the order, primarily opposing physical contact.

The appeal was dismissed, save that the order of the children’s court was set aside and replaced with a more detailed and structured contact order. The respondent grandmother was granted weekly telephonic contact, monthly day visits in Makhanda, and one week of holiday contact in Herschel during the mid-year and December/January school holidays, with supervision by the Department of Social Development during the first two holiday visits. No order as to costs was made.

The judgment reinforces the child-centred approach to contact disputes under the Children’s Act and confirms that grandparents and other non-parents with a genuine interest have locus standi to seek contact. It clarifies that implacable or unreasonable opposition by a custodial parent, absent demonstrable harm to the child, cannot defeat a child’s right to maintain relationships with extended family. The case is significant for its clear exposition of the shift from common-law parental authority to constitutional and statutory best-interests principles in access and contact disputes.