Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
MB v LC and Another (21586/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 61; 2024 (6) SA 546 (WCC) (29 February 2024)
Hague Convention application for the return of two children to Australia was dismissed after the court found consent, alternatively acquiescence, to their stay in South Africa.
Koch N O and Another v Ad hoc Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another (188/2021) [2022] ZASCA 60; [2022] 3 All SA 17 (SCA); 2022 (6) SA 323 (SCA) (26 April 2022)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the child’s continued retention in South Africa was wrongful, but the article 13(b) grave-risk defence succeeded and return to the UK was refused.
Central Authority for the Central Republic of South Africa and Another v C (20/18381) [2020] ZAGPJHC 236; 2021 (2) SA 471 (GJ) (15 September 2020)
High Court Hague Convention case dismissed a return application after finding the children were not habitually resident in Canada and, alternatively, that the father had consented or acquiesced.
Chief Family Advocate of the Republic of South Africa as represented by Mr Keuben Gounden, Senior Family Advocate, East London v IRRJ (EL528/2019; 1730/2019) [2019] ZAECELLC 17 (16 August 2019)
High Court Hague Convention case ordering the return of two children to New Zealand after finding their retention in South Africa wrongful.
L v Central Authority for the Republic South Africa and Another (24108/2016) [2018] ZAGPJHC 12 (20 February 2018)
The court found that the factual circumstances overwhelmingly demonstrated that the children’s habitual residence was Oslo, Norway, at the time of their retention in South Africa. The family had relocated to Oslo in 2013 with the intention to settle there, as evidenced by their registration, citizenship, schooling, medical arrangements, and the appellant’s own conduct in seeking permanent residence and employment in Norway. The existence of a home in Johannesburg was a neutral fact and did not alter the conclusion. The court further found that there was no evidence of consent or acquiescence…
Source excerpt
L v Center Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another (A5055/2016, 24108/2016) [2018] ZAGPJHC 71 (20 February 2018)
The High Court held that the children’s habitual residence was Norway and rejected claims of consent or acquiescence to their retention in South Africa.
Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa v Ashmore (10839/14) [2015] ZAKZDHC 88 (24 November 2015)
Hague Convention return application dismissed after the court found consent to retention in South Africa and held the child had settled there.
KG v CB and Others (748/11) [2012] ZASCA 17; 2012 (4) SA 136 (SCA); [2012] 2 All SA 366 (SCA) (22 March 2012)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that CB possessed rights of custody under UK law at the time of T’s removal, as he had parental responsibility and was exercising contact rights. KG’s removal of T from the United Kingdom without CB’s consent was wrongful under the Hague Convention. The appellant failed to prove any defence under Article 13: there was no clear evidence of CB’s consent or acquiescence, and the alleged grave risk of harm or intolerable situation was not substantiated. The court found that protective measures, including undertakings for accommodation, maintenance, and supervised…
Source excerpt
Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another v G (32652/2009) [2010] ZAGPPHC 526 (22 April 2010)
The court found that the minor child's habitual residence prior to removal was the United Kingdom, where both parents lived together. However, the evidence established that the second applicant consented to the respondent relocating permanently to South Africa with the child following their separation and agreement to divorce. The respondent's account was corroborated by her parents and by the conduct of the parties, including discussions about divorce and custody. The second applicant's own statements and actions indicated acquiescence to the child's removal and retention. Furthermore, the r…
Source excerpt
Central Authority of the Republic of South Africa and Another v LG (32652/2009) [2010] ZAGPPHC 261; 2011 (2) SA 386 (GNP) (22 April 2010)
High Court Hague Convention case denied the return of a child to the UK, finding the father had consented to the child’s permanent move to South Africa.
Explore more
