Abstract
In this contribution it is argued that the adversarial system of litigation does not serve the best interests of children upon divorce. After a brief analysis of the system it is concluded that other less aggressive means of litigation should be considered underupon divorce. Collaborative Law is suggested as a means to bear in mind. The fact that current practice of lawyer negotitiatons in respect of divorce is not too far removed from Collaborative Law may lead to practitioners readily accepting the concept.
Highlights
DIE ADVERSATIEWE STELSEL VAN BEWYSLEWERING EN DIE BESTE BELANG VAN DIE KIND IN EGSKEIDINGSAANGELEENTHEDE: ENKELE GEDAGTES OOR COLLABORATIVE LAW TER BESLEGTING VAN OUERLIKE
Sou "elke aangeleentheid" letterlik opgeneem word, spreek dit vanself dat bykans enige wetgewing of openbare aksie daartoe verplig sou wees om so die beste belang van kinders as deurslaggewend te beskou
Die vraag wat hom voordoen, is of die toepassing van die adversatiewe stelsel van bewyslewering in egskeidingsaangeleenthede gesien kan word as inbreukmakend op die beste belang van kinders wat in die proses betrokke is ofn belang by die uitkoms daarvan het; bring die aard van die stelsel mee dat ouers dermate aggressief ten aansien van hulle kinders litigeer dat die wenmotief swaarder as die kinders se belange weeg
Summary
The consequences (van adversatiewe litigasie) are devastating, for the children but for the adult participants as well. Talle alternatiewe om tekortkominge in die adversatiewe proses te ondervang het reeds die lig gesien. Mediasie word veral beklemtoon en vorm in mindere of meerdere maten bestanddeel van Family Relationship Centres soos die konsep in die Australiese reg ontwikkel het.[17] ʼn Verdere ontwikkeling wat in die jongste tyd veral in Amerika, 16 Tesler Collaborative Law 2. Kanada en die Verenigde Koninkryk veld wen, naamlik Collaborative Law (hierna CL) kom hieronder aan die orde. Hierdie proses volg opn siening dat mediasie sekere strukturele gebreke openbaar.[18] Dit hoort tot die wese van mediasie dat mediators neutraal moet wees en nie regsadvies sal gee nie. Hieruit voortvloeiend blyk dat mediasie soms minder effektief mag wees aangesien mediators dit moeilik mag vind om magswanbalanse en emosionele dinamiek van die partye te bestuur.[19]. Die bespreking van CL hieronder knoop aan die konsep as metode en dit spreek vanself dat dit die volledige veld van gesinslitigasie, en derhalwe ook onderhandelinge van ouers rondom sorg van en kontak met hulle kinders insluit
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
