Institute for Economic Justice and Another v Minister of Social Development and Others [2025] ZAGPPHC 29; [2025] 2 All SA 230 (GP); 2025 (4) SA 249 (GP) (23 January 2025)

Institute for Economic Justice and Another v Minister of Social Development and Others [2025] ZAGPPHC 29; [2025] 2 All SA 230 (GP); 2025 (4) SA 249 (GP) (23 January 2025)

The court found that the SRD grant regulations and procedures unlawfully and unconstitutionally excluded eligible applicants from accessing social assistance, violating section 27 of the Constitution. The online-only application process constituted an unreasonable barrier for poor and vulnerable persons, lacking justification for differentiation from other grants. The definitions of 'income' and 'financial support' were interpreted too broadly, resulting in unjust exclusions. Both the bank and database verification processes were unreliable, lacked conflict resolution mechanisms, and operated as blunt instruments that excluded deserving applicants. The payment of the SRD grant subject to...

Citation
[2025] ZAGPPHC 29
Parties
Applicant: Institute for Economic Justice; Applicant: #Paythegrants; Respondent: Minister of Social Development; Respondent: South African Social Security Agency; Respondent: Minister of Finance
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 January 2025
Case Number
071891/2023
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted. The impugned regulations are declared unconstitutional and invalid. Remedial and structural relief ordered. Costs awarded against the respondents.
Judges
Twala M L
Legal Topics
Social Assistance, Progressive Realisation, Regulatory Invalidity, Income Thresholds, Procedural Fairness, Bill of Rights Limitation
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Social Assistance Progressive Realisation Regulatory Invalidity Income Thresholds Procedural Fairness +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 6 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Institute for Economic Justice

Applicant

#Paythegrants

Applicant

Minister of Social Development

Respondent

South African Social Security Agency

Respondent

Minister of Finance

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the SRD grant regulations and procedures unlawfully and unconstitutionally exclude eligible applicants from accessing social assistance.
  2. 2 Whether the definition and application of 'income' and 'financial support' in the regulations are consistent with the Constitution and the Social Assistance Act.
  3. 3 Whether the online-only application process for the SRD grant constitutes an unreasonable barrier to access for poor and vulnerable persons.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the SRD grant regulations and procedures unlawfully and unconstitutionally excluded eligible applicants from accessing social assistance, violating section 27 of the Constitution. The online-only application process constituted an unreasonable barrier for poor and vulnerable persons, lacking justification for differentiation from other grants. The definitions of 'income' and 'financial support' were interpreted too broadly, resulting in unjust exclusions. Both the bank and database verification processes were unreliable, lacked conflict resolution mechanisms, and operated as blunt instruments that excluded deserving applicants. The payment of the SRD grant subject to...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The impugned regulations are declared unconstitutional and invalid. Remedial and structural relief ordered. Costs awarded against the respondents.

Orders

  • Regulation 3(2) requiring electronic-only SRD grant applications is declared unconstitutional and invalid.
  • The words 'or at the offices of the Agency' are to be read into Regulation 3(2) after 'on the electronic platform'.