Esheria Namibia Case Law
Sign in
Namibia Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Namibia Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Namibia case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Namibia decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Constitutional law [2011] NASC 10

Trustco Insurance t/a Legal Shield Namibia and Another v Deed Registries Regulation Board and Others (SA 14 of 2010)

Trustco Insurance t/a Legal Shield Namibia and Another v Deed Registries Regulation Board and Others (SA 14 of 2010) [2011] NASC 10 (15 July 2011)

Court
Supreme Court
Case number
SA 14 of 2010

The first appellant had standing as its legal obligations under the contract with the second appellant depended on the validity of the tariffs. The tariffs did not infringe Article 21(1)(j) because they were rational regulation and not a material barrier to practice. The tariffs did not constitute unreasonable administrative action under Article 18, as the fixed sliding scale was a reasonable policy choice by a specialist board. The Deeds Registries’ Tariff was not ultra vires section 10(1)(c), as the Board was empowered to prescribe fixed tariffs, including ad valorem fees.

Source excerpt

  • Standing (locus standi)
  • Freedom to practice a profession
  • Regulation of legal fees
  • Reasonableness of administrative action
  • Ultra vires challenge
Read case analysis
Constitutional law [2002] NAHC 4

Hendricks and Others v Attorney General of Namibia and Others (PA 140 of 2000)

Hendricks and Others v Attorney General of Namibia and Others (PA 140 of 2000) [2002] NAHC 4 (20 August 2002)

Court
High Court
Case number
PA 140 of 2000

Section 1(i) of the Act is unconstitutional to the extent it defines 'brothel' to include places used for 'unlawful carnal intercourse' or 'any other lewd or immoral purpose' as this is overbroad and not rationally connected to the Act's objectives. Sections 2(3) and 12(1) and (2) are unconstitutional as they impose reverse onus provisions that violate the presumption of innocence. The remainder of section 2(1) (brothel-keeping for prostitution) and section 10(a) (living on earnings of prostitution) are constitutional as they are reasonable restrictions on economic freedom and not overly broa…

Source excerpt

  • Vagueness and overbreadth
  • Economic freedom
  • Presumption of innocence
  • Reverse onus
  • Severability
  • Standing (locus standi)
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Namibia decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.