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
M.K v A.J.K (11407/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 288 (7 July 2025)
The High Court held that the child should remain in the mother’s care in South Africa pending divorce, and refused interim relocation to Qatar absent safeguards.
T.A.M-W v C.M.M (2025/030666) [2025] ZAWCHC 217 (23 May 2025)
The High Court held the respondent in contempt for retaining two minor children in Switzerland contrary to a consent order, and ordered their return and punitive costs.
Central Authority of Republic of South Africa and Another v C.M (2023/077002) [2025] ZAGPJHC 99 (10 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed a Hague Convention return application, finding the father had consented to removal and that returning the child to Israel posed a grave risk.
K.C v Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another (2024/047309) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1010 (7 October 2024)
The court considered the grounds for leave to appeal and the submissions of both parties. It applied the test under section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act, which sets a high threshold for granting leave to appeal. The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal, as the findings regarding habitual residence and the Article 13(b) defence were properly made in the original judgment. The court concluded that there was no compelling reason for the appeal to be heard and dismissed the application for leave to appeal.
Source excerpt
C.A.R v Central Authority of The Republic of South Africa and Another (737/2023) [2024] ZASCA 103; [2024] 3 All SA 653 (SCA); 2024 (6) SA 351 (SCA) (21 June 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the mother failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the return of the minor child to Canada would expose him to grave physical or psychological harm or place him in an intolerable situation as required by article 13(b) of the Hague Convention. The evidence did not establish that the child's developmental delays or medical issues could not be adequately addressed in Canada, nor that protective measures and undertakings offered by the father would be insufficient. The court held that the best interests of the child, in t…
Source excerpt
Ad Hoc Central Authority for the Republic of South Africa and Another v DM (18862/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 170 (19 June 2024)
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
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.
I.B.F v A.D.K and Another (2023-015928) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1129 (31 August 2023)
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
Lewis-Springfield v S (CA&R40/2022) [2022] ZANCHC 54 (4 October 2022)
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
S[....] v S[....] (D7960/2019) [2022] ZAKZDHC 7 (18 February 2022)
The High Court dismissed a father’s bid to enforce a mirror order returning a child to the UK, finding the child’s best interests required him to remain with his mother in South Africa.
Explore more
