Section 27 and Others v Minister of Education and Another (24565/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 114; [2012] 3 All SA 579 (GNP); 2013 (2) BCLR 237 (GNP); 2013 (2) SA 40 (GNP) (17 May 2012)

Section 27 and Others v Minister of Education and Another (24565/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 114; [2012] 3 All SA 579 (GNP); 2013 (2) BCLR 237 (GNP); 2013 (2) SA 40 (GNP) (17 May 2012)

The court held that the failure by the Limpopo Department of Education and the Department of Basic Education to provide textbooks to schools in Limpopo constituted a violation of the right to basic education under section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution. Textbooks are an essential component of basic education, as confirmed by government policy, performance targets, and curriculum strategies. The respondents' measures were found to be unreasonable given the urgency and their own targets. The court rejected the argument that bona fide conduct could excuse the violation. The applicants were entitled to declaratory and mandatory relief, including the development and implementation of a catch-up...

Citation
[2012] ZAGPPHC 114
Parties
Applicant: Section 27; Applicant: Dijannane Tumo Secondary School; Applicant: Tandanie Lydia Msipopetu; Respondent: Minister of Basic Education; Respondent: Member of the Executive Council of the Limpopo Department of Education
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 May 2012
Case Number
24565/2012
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / First Instance
Outcome
Application granted. The court declared the matter urgent, found a violation of the right to basic education, ordered delivery of textbooks, mandated a catch-up plan, and awarded costs to the applicants.
Judges
Kollapen
Legal Topics
Right to Basic Education, Urgent Interdict, Remedial Orders, Section 29 Constitution, Public Interest Litigation, School Governance
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Right to Basic Education Urgent Interdict Remedial Orders Section 29 Constitution Public Interest Litigation +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Section 27

Applicant

Dijannane Tumo Secondary School

Applicant

Tandanie Lydia Msipopetu

Applicant

Minister of Basic Education

Respondent

Member of the Executive Council of the Limpopo Department of Education

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure by the Limpopo Department of Education and the Department of Basic Education to provide textbooks to schools in Limpopo constitutes a violation of the right to basic education.
  2. 2 Whether the matter is sufficiently urgent to warrant immediate judicial intervention.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to a remedial 'catch-up plan' for affected learners.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the failure by the Limpopo Department of Education and the Department of Basic Education to provide textbooks to schools in Limpopo constituted a violation of the right to basic education under section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution. Textbooks are an essential component of basic education, as confirmed by government policy, performance targets, and curriculum strategies. The respondents' measures were found to be unreasonable given the urgency and their own targets. The court rejected the argument that bona fide conduct could excuse the violation. The applicants were entitled to declaratory and mandatory relief, including the development and implementation of a catch-up...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The court declared the matter urgent, found a violation of the right to basic education, ordered delivery of textbooks, mandated a catch-up plan, and awarded costs to the applicants.

Orders

  • It is declared the matter is urgent and may be considered as urgent in terms of Rule 6.12(b).
  • It is declared the failure by the Limpopo Department of Education and the Department of Basic Education to provide textbooks to schools in Limpopo is a violation of the right to basic education.