Lin and Another v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and Another (2014/22434) [2015] ZAGPJHC 245; [2016] 1 All SA 543 (GJ) (14 October 2015)

Lin and Another v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and Another (2014/22434) [2015] ZAGPJHC 245; [2016] 1 All SA 543 (GJ) (14 October 2015)

The court found that Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and Shirley Jones wilfully and intentionally disregarded three court orders requiring the return of the applicants' minor children to South Africa. The respondents' conduct was aggravated by their deliberate refusal to comply, lack of engagement with the court, failure to provide frank disclosure, and disregard for the constitutional rights of the children. The court emphasised the binding nature of court orders under section 165 of the Constitution and the paramount importance of the children's best interests. The respondents' explanations were rejected as unsupported by facts, and their reliance on legal advice was found to be an...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPJHC 245
Parties
Applicant: Hai Lin; Applicant: Ruihong Weng; Respondent: Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd; Respondent: Shirley Jones
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 October 2015
Case Number
2014/22434
Procedural Posture
Civil Contempt Application / Sanction and Penalty Determination Following Contempt Finding
Outcome
Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and Shirley Jones were found in contempt of court and fined. Orders for compliance and costs were granted against the respondents.
Judges
Spilg
Legal Topics
Civil Contempt of Court, Best Interests of the Child, Section 165 Constitution, Habeas Corpus, Costs Order, Corporate Liability
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Family and Children Civil Contempt of Court Best Interests of the Child Section 165 Constitution Habeas Corpus Costs Order +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hai Lin

Applicant

Ruihong Weng

Applicant

Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd

Respondent

Shirley Jones

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Contempt Application / Sanction and Penalty Determination Following Contempt Finding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sanction for the respondents' contempt of three court orders?
  2. 2 Did the respondents act wilfully and intentionally in disregarding the orders?
  3. 3 What aggravating and mitigating factors should be considered in determining the penalty?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and Shirley Jones wilfully and intentionally disregarded three court orders requiring the return of the applicants' minor children to South Africa. The respondents' conduct was aggravated by their deliberate refusal to comply, lack of engagement with the court, failure to provide frank disclosure, and disregard for the constitutional rights of the children. The court emphasised the binding nature of court orders under section 165 of the Constitution and the paramount importance of the children's best interests. The respondents' explanations were rejected as unsupported by facts, and their reliance on legal advice was found to be an...

Court Disposition

Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and Shirley Jones were found in contempt of court and fined. Orders for compliance and costs were granted against the respondents.

Orders

  • Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd is fined R350,000 for contempt of the court orders of 26 July and 28 July 2014.
  • Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd must pay a sum equal to the cost of a premium economy class ticket for each of the applicants' three children on a scheduled Cathay Pacific flight from Hong Kong to OR Tambo International Airport, or procure such tickets.