Visagie v State President and Others (553/87) [1989] ZASCA 83; [1989] 2 All SA 460 (A) (1 June 1989)

Visagie v State President and Others (553/87) [1989] ZASCA 83; [1989] 2 All SA 460 (A) (1 June 1989)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Minister was not required to afford the appellant a prior hearing before imposing conditions of release under subregulation 3(6) of the emergency regulations. The need for expedition in releasing detainees justified a subsequent hearing. The Minister's discretion was broad and, provided it was exercised bona fide, the court would not interfere with the relevance of facts considered. The conditions could not extend beyond the duration of the regulations, but as the emergency persisted, this argument failed. The first condition, restricting movement, was not grossly unreasonable or oppressive given the appellant's ability to obtain permission to...

Citation
[1989] ZASCA 83
Parties
Appellant: Abraham Johannes Visagie; Respondent: State President; Respondent: Minister of Law and Order; Respondent: Commissioner of South African Police
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 June 1989
Case Number
553/87
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Declaratory Relief and Costs in the Eastern Cape Division
Outcome
Appeal succeeds in part; the fourth condition of release is declared void; costs awarded to appellant for appeal and half the costs in the court below.
Judges
Joubert, Hoexter, Hefer, Vivier, Kumleben
Legal Topics
Natural Justice, Audi Alteram Partem, Ministerial Discretion, Conditional Release, Ultra Vires, Void for Uncertainty
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Natural Justice Audi Alteram Partem Ministerial Discretion Conditional Release Ultra Vires Void for Uncertainty

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abraham Johannes Visagie

Appellant

State President

Respondent

Minister of Law and Order

Respondent

Commissioner of South African Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Application for Declaratory Relief and Costs in the Eastern Cape Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Minister was obliged to afford the appellant a prior hearing before imposing conditions of release.
  2. 2 Whether the Minister considered extraneous or irrelevant factors in imposing the conditions.
  3. 3 Whether the conditions of release were ultra vires by extending beyond the duration of the regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Minister was not required to afford the appellant a prior hearing before imposing conditions of release under subregulation 3(6) of the emergency regulations. The need for expedition in releasing detainees justified a subsequent hearing. The Minister's discretion was broad and, provided it was exercised bona fide, the court would not interfere with the relevance of facts considered. The conditions could not extend beyond the duration of the regulations, but as the emergency persisted, this argument failed. The first condition, restricting movement, was not grossly unreasonable or oppressive given the appellant's ability to obtain permission to...

Court Disposition

Appeal succeeds in part; the fourth condition of release is declared void; costs awarded to appellant for appeal and half the costs in the court below.

Orders

  • The appeal succeeds. The costs of the appeal will be paid by the second respondent. The appellant will pay the costs of the application for condonation.
  • The orders made by the court a quo are set aside and substituted as follows: (a) The application succeeds to the limited extent that the fourth condition of release imposed by the second respondent on the applicant is declared void. (b) Save that the applicant will bear the wasted costs on Friday 5 December 1986,...