Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright in all material published in PER/PELJ vests in the author, provided that authors grant, by submission of their contributions, permission that their contributions may be shared and adapted without restriction. An author furthermore agrees that the same contribution may not be published elsewhere without the written permission of the editor.
Anyone gaining access, electronically or otherwise, to a contribution to PER, may quote from such contribution, use the intellectual content thereof, share and adapt it, but subject to the following conditions:
you must give appropriate credit, provide a link and indicate if changes were made; and
the copyright of the author(s) may not be infringed in any way.
Main Article Content
The right of the child to care and constitutional damages for the loss of parental care: some thoughts on <i>M v Minister of police</i> and <i>Minister of police v Mboweni</i>
Abstract
In the a quo judgment in M v Minister of Police a radical new approach was followed in respect of claims for loss of parental care. The issue before court was whether a child whose parent has died as a result of the wrongful conduct of the South African Police Services may sue for damages arising from the child's constitutional right to parental care in terms of section 28(1)(b). The question which the Court had to answer was whether a claim for damages may be instituted on the grounds that children are as a result of the wrongful death of their father deprived of their constitutionally entrenched right to parental care.
This contribution reflects on the reasoning of the different courts and the relevance of same for the debate regarding the care of children in terms of section 28(1)(b) of the Constitution and section 1 of the Children's Act 38 of 2005.
KEYWORDS: parental care; Children's Act 38 of 2005; constitutional damages; appropriate relief.
