South Africa Case Law

C.A.L.S v S (CA&R 66/2023)

C.A.L.S v S (CA&R 66/2023) [2025] ZANCHC 35; 2025 (2) SACR 174 (NCK) (17 April 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R 66/2023

Judges

Tlaletsi JP, Stanton J

The court held that the appellant’s conduct—removing and retaining his minor children in South Africa without the mother’s consent and in breach of a US custody order—constitutes an offence under South African law, specifically contempt of court and contravention of section 305(1)(q) of the Children’s Act. This satisfies the requirement of dual criminality, as the conduct is punishable by imprisonment for six months or more in both jurisdictions. The section 10(2) certificate from the US authorities was properly accepted as conclusive proof of sufficient evidence for prosecution. The appellan…

Source excerpt

• Extradition Act
• International Parental Kidnapping
• Dual Criminality
• Child Abduction
• Contempt Of Court

Ad Hoc Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another v DM (18862/2023)

Ad Hoc Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another v DM (18862/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 170 (19 June 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

18862/2023

Judge

J Cloete

The applicants failed to discharge the onus of proving that the children were habitually resident in Germany immediately before their retention in South Africa. The evidence did not support a mutual intention to relocate permanently to Germany, and the circumstances indicated the move was temporary and prompted by the pandemic. The father's actions, such as hiding the children's passports, further undermined the claim of habitual residence. Consequently, the Hague Convention does not apply. Even if habitual residence had been established, the mother did not meet the high threshold required fo…

Source excerpt

• Child Abduction
• Habitual Residence
• Hague Convention
• Children's Best Interests
• Interim Contact
• Jurisdictional Facts

I.B.F v A.D.K and Another (015928/2023)

I.B.F v A.D.K and Another (015928/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 296 (22 March 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

015928/2023

Judge

Swanepoel

The High Court confirmed a rule nisi in a child-contact dispute, dismissed a postponement application and an urgent application, and awarded punitive costs.

• Child Abduction
• Parental Alienation
• Costs Order
• Rule Nisi Confirmation
• Therapy And Parental Coordination
• Child-abduction

I.B.F v A.D.K and Another (2023-015928)

I.B.F v A.D.K and Another (2023-015928) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1129 (31 August 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023-015928

Judge

Swanepoel

The court found that the Hague Convention does not apply as Sint Maarten is not a signatory. The paramount consideration is the best interests of the children, as required by the Children’s Act and the Constitution. The evidence demonstrated severe parental alienation, with the applicant enlisting the children as allies against the respondent and exposing them to litigation details, causing emotional harm. The children are settled and happy in South Africa and strongly opposed to returning to Sint Maarten. Returning them would exacerbate their trauma. Both parties have failed the children, bu…

Source excerpt

• Parental Alienation
• Child Abduction
• Best Interests Of The Child
• Hague Convention
• Care And Contact
• Therapy And Parental Coordination

Lewis-Springfield v S (CA&R40/2022)

Lewis-Springfield v S (CA&R40/2022) [2022] ZANCHC 54 (4 October 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

CA&R 40/2022

Judge

Kgopa

The court found that the magistrate was empowered under section 9(2) of the Extradition Act to entertain bail pending extradition enquiry. The conduct alleged against the appellant, though termed 'International Parental Kidnapping' in the United States, corresponds to offences such as kidnapping, contempt of court, and child abduction under South African law, particularly given the existence of a custody order and the provisions of the Children’s Act and Hague Convention. The magistrate had sufficient information to consider the bail application, and the appellant failed to satisfy the court…

Source excerpt

• Extradition Act
• Bail Pending Extradition
• International Parental Kidnapping
• Child Abduction
• Hague Convention
• Contempt Of Court

Msiza v Msiza and Another (M271/15)

Msiza v Msiza and Another (M271/15) [2016] ZANWHC 23; 2017 (1) SACR 42 (NWM) (26 May 2016)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M271/15

Judge

Landman

The High Court dismissed a contempt application against police officials, holding they were only required to assist the sheriff if requested and had done so.

• Contempt Of Court
• Execution Of Court Orders
• Child Abduction
• Role Of Sheriff
• Urgent Interdict
• Contempt-of-court

Louw v Louw (175/2004)

Louw v Louw (175/2004) [2004] ZANCHC 13 (2 April 2004)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

175/2004

Judge

Lacock R

High Court set aside an ex parte interim custody order, finding no urgency and holding that custody should be determined in Namibia, the child’s habitual residence.

• Interim Custody
• Child Abduction
• Best Interests Of Child
• Urgent Application Procedure
• Interim-custody
• Child-abduction

S v Matsane (210/86)

S v Matsane (210/86) [1986] ZASCA 132 (27 November 1986)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

210/86

Judges

Botha, Jacobs, Nestadt

The court upheld Albert Matsane’s convictions for murder and child abduction, finding the circumstantial evidence and confession sufficient despite no body being found.

• Murder
• Child Abduction
• Admissibility Of Confession
• Corpus Delicti
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Circumstantial-evidence

S v Britz (196/1983)

S v Britz (196/1983) [1984] ZASCA 114 (26 September 1984)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

196/1983

Judges

A.S. Botha, P.J. Wessels, C.P. Joubert, G.G. Hoexter, J.W. Smalberger

The court held that an eight-year sentence for child theft was shockingly excessive and substituted 18 months’ imprisonment, leading to the appellant’s immediate release.

• Sentencing Principles
• Child Abduction
• Mitigating Factors
• Suspended Sentence
• Criminal-law
• Sentencing-principles