Court
075
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, GAUTENG (REPULIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) CASE NUMBER: 10/2012 In the Appeal between: HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, FREE STATE APPELLANT
And
JOLENE PAKKIES Acting on behalf of Dineo Tau Zozo Tau Lulu Tau
RESPONDENT
___________________________________________________________________________ HEADS OF ARGUMENT OF APPELLANT ___________________________________________________________________________ In an Appeal to the Constitutional Court the Appellant, the Head of the Department of Social Development (hereafter referred to as the Head of the Department), appeals against the decision of the Freestate High Court, Bloemfontein, who inter alia: 1. Set aside the decision of the Head of the Department not to recognize the Tau children as a child-headed household. 2. Declared section 137(1)(c) of the Children’s Act invalid, due to the fact that the age limit of 16 years is too rigid and prevents the best interest of the child from being considered on an individual basis. The facts if the case is as follows: Mrs Pakkies, a social worker from a non-governmental organisation “Saving Children” (hereafter referred to as the Respondant), applied on behalf of the Tau-children - Dineo a 15 year old girl and eldest sister of Zozo (a boy aged 12) and Lulu (a girl aged 10) - to be declared a child-headed household. This will enable the children to qualify for a child support grant in terms of the Social Assistance Act, Act 13 of 2004 (hereinafter referred to as Social Assistance Act). The children live
1
075
On their own in an impoverished village in their deceased widowed mother’s house, who died a year earlier. The children have been managing with the help of neighbours and the school feeding scheme. Dineo has been employed as a cleaner at a nearby shebeen, after school, during the week. The children have to manage without electricity. The Head of the Department (hereafter referred to as the Appellant) opposed their
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, GAUTENG (REPULIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) CASE NUMBER: 10/2012 In the Appeal between: HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, FREE STATE APPELLANT
And
JOLENE PAKKIES Acting on behalf of Dineo Tau Zozo Tau Lulu Tau
RESPONDENT
___________________________________________________________________________ HEADS OF ARGUMENT OF APPELLANT ___________________________________________________________________________ In an Appeal to the Constitutional Court the Appellant, the Head of the Department of Social Development (hereafter referred to as the Head of the Department), appeals against the decision of the Freestate High Court, Bloemfontein, who inter alia: 1. Set aside the decision of the Head of the Department not to recognize the Tau children as a child-headed household. 2. Declared section 137(1)(c) of the Children’s Act invalid, due to the fact that the age limit of 16 years is too rigid and prevents the best interest of the child from being considered on an individual basis. The facts if the case is as follows: Mrs Pakkies, a social worker from a non-governmental organisation “Saving Children” (hereafter referred to as the Respondant), applied on behalf of the Tau-children - Dineo a 15 year old girl and eldest sister of Zozo (a boy aged 12) and Lulu (a girl aged 10) - to be declared a child-headed household. This will enable the children to qualify for a child support grant in terms of the Social Assistance Act, Act 13 of 2004 (hereinafter referred to as Social Assistance Act). The children live
1
075
On their own in an impoverished village in their deceased widowed mother’s house, who died a year earlier. The children have been managing with the help of neighbours and the school feeding scheme. Dineo has been employed as a cleaner at a nearby shebeen, after school, during the week. The children have to manage without electricity. The Head of the Department (hereafter referred to as the Appellant) opposed their