Economic Freedom Fighters and Others v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (9873/21) [2024] ZAWCHC 160 (10 June 2024)

Economic Freedom Fighters and Others v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (9873/21) [2024] ZAWCHC 160 (10 June 2024)

The court found that the applicants' members deliberately and unlawfully disrupted parliamentary proceedings and were ejected only after refusing to comply with valid instructions. There was no evidence of gratuitous violence or unlawful conduct by the respondents. The applicants did not challenge the constitutionality or lawfulness of the parliamentary rules or the targeted legislation, which expressly excludes liability for damages for acts done in good faith under parliamentary authority. The claims for constitutional damages were prescribed and fatally flawed due to the applicants' failure to comply with statutory notice requirements. The common law of delict would have provided an...

Citation
[2024] ZAWCHC 160
Parties
Applicant: Economic Freedom Fighters; Applicant: Second to Twenty-fourth Applicants (listed in Annexure A); Respondent: Speaker of the National Assembly; Respondent: Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces; Respondent: Minister of Police
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 June 2024
Case Number
9873/21
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Application / Opposed Application for Declaratory and Constitutional Damages
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
E D Wille
Legal Topics
Parliamentary Privileges and Immunities, Freedom of Speech Limitation, Declaratory Relief, Constitutional Damages, Prescription, Rule of Law
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Parliamentary Privileges and Immunities Freedom of Speech Limitation Declaratory Relief Constitutional Damages Prescription Rule of Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Economic Freedom Fighters

Applicant

Second to Twenty-fourth Applicants (listed in Annexure A)

Applicant

Speaker of the National Assembly

Respondent

Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces

Respondent

Minister of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Application / Opposed Application for Declaratory and Constitutional Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ejection of the applicants from parliamentary proceedings was unconstitutional.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are entitled to constitutional damages for alleged gratuitous violence during their removal.
  3. 3 Whether the application is fatally flawed due to prescription and failure to comply with statutory notice requirements.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants' members deliberately and unlawfully disrupted parliamentary proceedings and were ejected only after refusing to comply with valid instructions. There was no evidence of gratuitous violence or unlawful conduct by the respondents. The applicants did not challenge the constitutionality or lawfulness of the parliamentary rules or the targeted legislation, which expressly excludes liability for damages for acts done in good faith under parliamentary authority. The claims for constitutional damages were prescribed and fatally flawed due to the applicants' failure to comply with statutory notice requirements. The common law of delict would have provided an...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The first applicant is ordered to pay the application costs.