Wallach v Selvan and Others (CCT15/01) [2001] ZACC 24; 2000 (11) BCLR 1195 (CC) (21 August 2001)

Wallach v Selvan and Others (CCT15/01) [2001] ZACC 24; 2000 (11) BCLR 1195 (CC) (21 August 2001)

The Constitutional Court found that the applicant's challenge to the appointment of the first respondent as acting judge was without merit. The High Court had provided detailed reasons for dismissing the application, and the refusal of leave to appeal by both the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal was justified. The applicant was not denied procedural fairness, as he was notified of the hearing and reasons were furnished. There was no constitutional issue warranting direct access, and the alleged failure to provide reasons was factually incorrect. The application for direct access and alternative relief was dismissed.

Citation
[2001] ZACC 24
Parties
Applicant: Peter Siegwart Wallach; Respondent: Ronald Lester Selvan; Respondent: The Society of Advocates of South Africa (Witwatersrand Division); Respondent: The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
21 August 2001
Case Number
CCT 15/01
Procedural Posture
Direct Access Application / Application for Direct Access and Alternative Relief
Outcome
Application for direct access and alternative relief dismissed.
Judges
Kriegler, Chaskalson, Langa, Ackermann, Goldstone, Madala, Mokgoro, O'Regan, Sachs, Yacoob
Legal Topics
Direct Access, Judicial Appointment Challenge, Leave to Appeal, Constitutional Rights, Procedural Fairness
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Direct Access Judicial Appointment Challenge Leave to Appeal Constitutional Rights Procedural Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Siegwart Wallach

Applicant

Ronald Lester Selvan

Respondent

The Society of Advocates of South Africa (Witwatersrand Division)

Respondent

The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Direct Access Application / Application for Direct Access and Alternative Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to direct access to the Constitutional Court to challenge the appointment of the first respondent as acting judge.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness in the High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the alleged failure to provide reasons for dismissal constitutes a constitutional infringement.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court found that the applicant's challenge to the appointment of the first respondent as acting judge was without merit. The High Court had provided detailed reasons for dismissing the application, and the refusal of leave to appeal by both the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal was justified. The applicant was not denied procedural fairness, as he was notified of the hearing and reasons were furnished. There was no constitutional issue warranting direct access, and the alleged failure to provide reasons was factually incorrect. The application for direct access and alternative relief was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for direct access and alternative relief dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for direct access to the Constitutional Court and for alternative relief is dismissed.