The South African Hang and Paragliding Association and Another v Bewick

The respondent, Mrs Diane Elizabeth Bewick, was severely injured and rendered paraplegic during a tandem paragliding flight for reward near Hermanus on 12 April 2004. She had contracted with commercial operators for the flight and was flown by an experienced pilot. Shortly after take-off the paraglider suffered a wing collapse, resulting in a collision with the hillside. Bewick sued multiple defendants for damages. She settled with the pilot and his employers and withdrew claims against the Department of Transport, leaving only the South African Hang and Paragliding Association (SAHPA) and the South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA). Her claim against them was based on an alleged omission: that tandem paragliding for reward was illegal at the time, that the appellants knew this, were under statutory duties to prevent or terminate such illegal activity, negligently failed to do so, and that this failure caused her injuries.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the respondent’s claim against SAHPA and SACAA with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

The case is significant for clarifying South African delictual liability for omissions by statutory and regulatory bodies. It reaffirms that the breach of a statutory duty or regulatory failure does not automatically give rise to delictual liability, and that wrongfulness depends on policy considerations. The judgment limits the exposure of regulators to private-law damages claims arising from enforcement failures.