Afriforum v South African Human Rights Commission and Others (14370-2019) [2024] ZAGPJHC 317 (27 March 2024)
- Citation
- [2024] ZAGPJHC 317
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Panel
- Roland Sutherland
- Case number
- 14370/2019
More details
- Court
- South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
- Panel
- Roland Sutherland
- Case number
- 14370/2019
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that both the South African Human Rights Commission and Afriforum raised issues that warrant consideration by an appellate court. Leave to appeal was granted to the Commission against the order. Conditional leave to cross appeal was granted to Afriforum, subject to the appeal court determining that the SAHRC's decision of 8 March 2019 is reviewable. The court held that the costs of both the appeal and cross appeal should be costs in the appeal itself, ensuring fairness to all parties. The judgment was delivered promptly and communicated via the court's digital system and email to the parties' attorneys.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal granted to the South African Human Rights Commission; conditional leave to cross appeal granted to Afriforum; costs of appeal and cross appeal to be costs in the appeal.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted to the South African Human Rights Commission against the order.
- Conditional leave to cross appeal is granted to Afriforum, subject to the appeal court finding the SAHRC decision of 8 March 2019 reviewable.
- Afriforum may seek on appeal the relief contained in its notice of motion, including review and setting aside or correction of the SAHRC decision, or remittal to the High Court for further hearing.
- Costs of the appeal and cross appeal shall be costs in the appeal itself.
02
Material facts
Parties
Afriforum
Applicant Counsel: C Woodrow SCSouth African Human Rights Commission
Respondent Counsel: K PillayChairperson: Bongani
RespondentCommissioner Priscilla Jana N.O
RespondentJulius Malema
RespondentEconomic Freedom Fighters
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Conditional Cross Leave to Appeal
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether leave to appeal should be granted to the South African Human Rights Commission against the High Court order.
- 02
Whether Afriforum should be granted conditional leave to cross appeal regarding the reviewability of the SAHRC decision of 8 March 2019.
- 03
Whether costs of appeal and cross appeal should be costs in the appeal itself.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Afriforum argued that the decision of the South African Human Rights Commission dated 8 March 2019 is reviewable and that, should the appeal court find it to be so, Afriforum should be granted leave to cross appeal to seek the setting aside or correction of that decision, or alternatively, remittal of the matter for further hearing.
- Respondent
- The South African Human Rights Commission sought leave to appeal against the High Court order, contending that its decision was not reviewable and that the relief sought by Afriforum should not be granted. The Commission opposed the conditional cross appeal and maintained that the High Court's findings should stand.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013
Leave to appeal should be granted where there is a reasonable prospect that another court may come to a different conclusion.
- 02
Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000
A decision by an administrative body may be reviewable if it constitutes administrative action as defined in law.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that both the South African Human Rights Commission and Afriforum raised issues that warrant consideration by an appellate court. Leave to appeal was granted to the Commission against the order. Conditional leave to cross appeal was granted to Afriforum, subject to the appeal court determining that the SAHRC's decision of 8 March 2019 is reviewable. The court held that the costs of both the appeal and cross appeal should be costs in the appeal itself, ensuring fairness to all parties. The judgment was delivered promptly and communicated via the court's digital system and email to the parties' attorneys.
Obiter and limits
- The judgment was delivered by uploading to the caselines digital database and by email, reflecting the court's commitment to efficient communication.
- The conditional nature of the cross appeal ensures that unnecessary litigation is avoided if the appellate court finds the SAHRC decision not reviewable.
Court disposition
Leave to appeal granted to the South African Human Rights Commission; conditional leave to cross appeal granted to Afriforum; costs of appeal and cross appeal to be costs in the appeal.
- Leave to appeal is granted to the South African Human Rights Commission against the order.
- Conditional leave to cross appeal is granted to Afriforum, subject to the appeal court finding the SAHRC decision of 8 March 2019 reviewable.
- Afriforum may seek on appeal the relief contained in its notice of motion, including review and setting aside or correction of the SAHRC decision, or remittal to the High Court for further hearing.
- Costs of the appeal and cross appeal shall be costs in the appeal itself.
Source and reliance status
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Judgment
REPUBLIC
OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
Case no: 14370/2019
31328/2019
1. REPORTABLE: no
2. OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: no
In the matter between:
AFRIFORUM
First Applicant
and
THE SOUTH AFRICAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION First Respondent
THE CHAIRPERSON: BONGANI
Second Respondent
CHRISTOPHER MAJOLA N.O
COMMISSIONER PRISCILLA JANA N.O
Third Respondent
JULIUS
MALEMA
Fourth Respondent
ECONOMIC
FREEDOM FIGHTERS
Fifth Respondent
And,
FREDERIK WILLEM DE KLERK N.O
First Applicant
DAVID WHITEFOORDT STEWARD N.O
Second Applicant
HERMAN BAILEY N.O
Third Applicant
BEN COETZEE BESTER N.O
Fourth Applicant
WARREN ALEXANDER MORTEN CLEWLOW N.O Fifth Applicant
ELIZABETH DE KLERK N.O
Sixth Applicant
THEUNIS ELOFF N.O
Seventh Applicant
DEENADA YALEN KONAR N.O
Eighth Applicant
FORTUNATE MASHEBU MATHEBULA N.O
Ninth Applicant
And
THE
SOUTH AFRICAN RIGHTS COMMISSION First Respondent
THE CHAIRPERSON: BONGANI
Second Respondent
COMMISSIONER PRISCILLA JANA N.O
Third Respondent
JULIUS
MALEMA
Fourth Respondent
ECONOMIC
FREEDOM FIGHTERS
Fifth Respondent
This judgment for application for leave to appeal has been delivered by uploading it to the caselines digital database of the Gauteng
Division of the High Court of South Africa, Johannesburg, and by email to the attorneys of record of the parties on 27 March 2024.
JUDGMENT
ON LEAVE TO APPEAL
Sutherland DJP:
[1] In this matter, which is an application for leave to appeal, and then an application on a conditional basis for a cross leave to appeal.
[2] After hearing counsel I am satisfied that its appropriate that leave to appeal be granted and that the application for leave to cross appeal similarly be granted.
[3] Therefore, I make the following order:
(1) Leave to appeal is granted to the South African Human Rights Commission against the order.
(2) Leave to appeal is granted to the first applicant (Afriforum) in terms set out below:
2.1 That, conditional on the appeal court finding that the finding/decision of the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) of 8 March 2019 constitutes a decision of the type that is reviewable, Afriforum be granted leave to cross appeal against the order contained in paragraph 2 of the High Court order in order to seek an order on appeal:
2.1.1 Granting the relief contained in the notice of motion of Afriforum, specifically that the decision of the SAHRC of 8 March 2019 be reviewed and set aside; alternatively be reviewed and corrected; alternatively
2.1.2 Remitting the case to the High Court for the further hearing of the matter on such terms as the appeal court may determine.
(3) The costs of the appeal and the cross appeal shall be costs in the appeal itself.
Roland Sutherland
Deputy Judge President, Gauteng Division, Johannesburg.
Heard: 27 March 2024
Judgment: 27 March 2024
Appearances:
For Afriforum:
Adv C Woodrow SC
Instructed by Hurter Spies Incorporated
For South African Human Rights Commission:
Adv K Pillay,
With her, Adv K Hardy
Instructed by South African Human Rights Commission
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.