South African Hang and Paragliding Association and Another v Bewick (1010/2013) [2015] ZASCA 34; 2015 (3) SA 449 (SCA); [2015] 2 All SA 581 (SCA) (25 March 2015)

South African Hang and Paragliding Association and Another v Bewick (1010/2013) [2015] ZASCA 34; 2015 (3) SA 449 (SCA); [2015] 2 All SA 581 (SCA) (25 March 2015)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that, even assuming tandem paragliding for reward was illegal at the time of the accident, the appellants' omission to prevent the activity was not wrongful in the delictual sense. The court found that the statutory obligations of the appellants were aimed at aviation safety, and there was no evidence that payment of a reward increased the risk of harm. The overwhelming view in the paragliding community, including the regulatory authorities, was that tandem paragliding for reward should be legalised and did not pose additional safety risks. Imposing liability for an omission unrelated to safety would be unreasonable and contrary to public policy....

Citation
[2015] ZASCA 34
Parties
Appellant: South African Hang and Paragliding Association; Appellant: South African Civil Aviation Authority; Respondent: Diane Elizabeth Bewick (nee Miller)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 March 2015
Case Number
1010/2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape Division of the High Court, Cape Town
Outcome
Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with dismissal of the respondent's claim against the appellants with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
Judges
Brand, Mhlantla, Leach, Saldulker, Mbha
Legal Topics
Wrongfulness of Omission, Statutory Duty, Causation, Aviation Regulation, Liability for Illegal Activity
Delict Civil Procedure Wrongfulness of Omission Statutory Duty Causation Aviation Regulation Liability for Illegal Activity

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Hang and Paragliding Association

Appellant

South African Civil Aviation Authority

Appellant

Diane Elizabeth Bewick (nee Miller)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape Division of the High Court, Cape Town

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether tandem paragliding for reward was illegal at the time of the respondent's accident.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants were under a statutory duty to prevent or terminate illegal tandem paragliding for reward.
  3. 3 Whether the appellants' omission to prevent the activity was wrongful in the delictual sense.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that, even assuming tandem paragliding for reward was illegal at the time of the accident, the appellants' omission to prevent the activity was not wrongful in the delictual sense. The court found that the statutory obligations of the appellants were aimed at aviation safety, and there was no evidence that payment of a reward increased the risk of harm. The overwhelming view in the paragliding community, including the regulatory authorities, was that tandem paragliding for reward should be legalised and did not pose additional safety risks. Imposing liability for an omission unrelated to safety would be unreasonable and contrary to public policy....

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced with dismissal of the respondent's claim against the appellants with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

Orders

  • The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel for both appellants.
  • The order of the court a quo is set aside and replaced by: 'The plaintiff's claim against the fourth and fifth defendants is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel in respect of both these defendants.'