Ramsamy v Minister of Home Affairs (98/02) [2002] ZAECHC 13 (26 April 2002)

Ramsamy v Minister of Home Affairs (98/02) [2002] ZAECHC 13 (26 April 2002)

The court found that all applicants were illegally present in South Africa at the time of their arrest and detention, as their permits had expired and they failed to apply for extensions or renewals. The applicants were informed of the reasons for their prohibited status and their rights to review, but did not utilize the procedures available under the Aliens Control Act. The court held that the applicants failed to establish any factual or legal basis for the relief sought, including release from detention, prohibition of removal, or access to further information. The provisions of the Aliens Control Act were not shown to be in conflict with the Promotion of Access to Information Act or...

Citation
[2002] ZAECHC 13
Parties
Applicant: Laval Ramsamy; Applicant: Rishideo Mungur; Applicant: Robin Gooranah; Applicant: Rajesh Atchanah; Applicant: Rita Atchanah; Respondent: Minister of Home Affairs; Respondent: D.G. Lackay
Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 April 2002
Case Number
98/02
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Froneman
Legal Topics
Aliens Control Act, Detention and Removal, Temporary Residence Permit, Procedural Fairness, Access to Information
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Aliens Control Act Detention and Removal Temporary Residence Permit Procedural Fairness Access to Information

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Laval Ramsamy

Applicant

Rishideo Mungur

Applicant

Robin Gooranah

Applicant

Rajesh Atchanah

Applicant

Rita Atchanah

Applicant

Minister of Home Affairs

Respondent

D.G. Lackay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants were legally present in South Africa at the time of their arrest and detention.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were entitled to the relief sought, including release from detention and prohibition of removal.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants were provided with adequate information regarding their status as prohibited persons and their rights to review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that all applicants were illegally present in South Africa at the time of their arrest and detention, as their permits had expired and they failed to apply for extensions or renewals. The applicants were informed of the reasons for their prohibited status and their rights to review, but did not utilize the procedures available under the Aliens Control Act. The court held that the applicants failed to establish any factual or legal basis for the relief sought, including release from detention, prohibition of removal, or access to further information. The provisions of the Aliens Control Act were not shown to be in conflict with the Promotion of Access to Information Act or...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.