South Africa Case Law

HOD: Western Cape Education Department and Others v Equal Education Law Centre and Others (1003/2023)

HOD: Western Cape Education Department and Others v Equal Education Law Centre and Others (1003/2023) [2025] ZASCA 116 (11 August 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1003/2023

Judges

Nicholls, Mbatha, Windell, Bloem, Molitsoane

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Rule 53(1)(b) of the Uniform Rules of Court is limited to the production of records relevant to the administrative decision subject to judicial review. The High Court erred by granting an order compelling the Department to produce documents and information unrelated to the specific review relief sought, including materials intended to support declaratory and mandamus claims. Such relief requires separate procedural mechanisms and cannot be obtained through Rule 53. The Department had provided a record sufficient for the review of its placement decisions f…

Source excerpt

• Uniform Rule 53
• Judicial Review
• Right To Education
• Mandamus Relief
• Declaratory Relief
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act

Mkhabela v Minister of Police and Another (829/2023)

Mkhabela v Minister of Police and Another (829/2023) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 71 (6 August 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

829/2023

Judge

Shai

The High Court found the plaintiff’s arrest, detention, and prosecution unlawful, awarding damages against the police and prosecutor.

• Unlawful Arrest
• Unlawful Detention
• Malicious Prosecution
• Constitutional Right To Freedom
• Actio Iniuriarum
• Damages Assessment

Kunene and Another v Malema (A2023/092235)

Kunene and Another v Malema (A2023/092235) [2025] ZAGPJHC 742 (5 August 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2023/092235

Judges

Wilson, Mfenyana, Wentzel

The court held that Mr. Kunene's repeated use of the word 'cockroach' to describe Mr. Malema in a televised political debate constituted hate speech under section 10 of the Equality Act. The term 'cockroach' carries internationally recognised genocidal and dehumanising connotations, particularly in the context of political conflict, and its use was reasonably understood as intended to promote hatred and incite harm against Mr. Malema based on his political beliefs and conscience. The court rejected the argument that political affiliation cannot be a ground for hate speech, finding that consci…

Source excerpt

• Hate Speech
• Equality Act Section 10
• Political Expression
• Limits On Free Speech

Jemsana v Minister of Police (1220/2019)

Jemsana v Minister of Police (1220/2019) [2025] ZAECMHC 69 (5 August 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

1220/2019

Judge

JGA Laing

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate a reasonable prospect of success on appeal as required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The police did not act unlawfully in arresting and detaining the applicant, as the officer verified informer information by questioning and searching the applicant, discovering dagga at his residence. The officer's discretion was exercised rationally, considering the seriousness of the offence, the applicant's unknown status, and the circumstances of the arrest. The alleged assault was not pleaded or pursued, and the court was constrained…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Unlawful Arrest
• Unlawful Detention
• Police Discretion
• Damages
• Superior Courts Act

Mbeki and Another v Calata and Others (005245/2025)

Mbeki and Another v Calata and Others (005245/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 753 (1 August 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

005245/2025

Judge

Millar

The High Court dismissed Thabo Mbeki and Brigitte Mabandla’s bid to intervene, holding they lacked a direct and substantial interest in the main case.

• Intervention Under Uniform Rule 12
• Direct And Substantial Interest
• Commission Of Inquiry
• Constitutional Damages
• Political Interference
• Truth And Reconciliation Commission Cases

Mereki and Others v Moladora Trust and Another (CCT 121/24)

Mereki and Others v Moladora Trust and Another (CCT 121/24) [2025] ZACC 16 (1 August 2025)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 121/24

Judges

Madlanga ADCJ, Dambuza AJ, Goosen AJ, Kollapen J, Majiedt J, Opperman AJ, Rogers J, Theron J, Tshiqi J

The Constitutional Court held that the applicants, as ESTA occupiers, had a right to graze cattle on the farm based on tacit consent, which was protected under ESTA. The Court found that the Trust failed to rebut the statutory presumption of consent triggered by the applicants' uninterrupted residence and use of the land. The termination of grazing rights constituted a deprivation of land use and required compliance with section 8 of ESTA. The Trust's reliance on common law termination was unlawful, as ESTA's procedural safeguards applied to both residence and associated land uses such as gra…

Source excerpt

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Tacit Consent
• Termination Of Land Rights
• Eviction Procedure
• Constitutional Interpretation
• Presumption Of Consent

Corruption Watch (RF) NPC v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT 333/23)

Corruption Watch (RF) NPC v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT 333/23) [2025] ZACC 15 (1 August 2025)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 333/23

Judges

Madlanga ADCJ, Dambuza AJ, Goosen AJ, Kollapen J, Mhlantla J, Opperman AJ, Rogers J, Theron J, Tshiqi J

The National Assembly failed to comply with its constitutional obligation to facilitate reasonable public involvement in the appointment of Commissioners to the Commission for Gender Equality. The information provided to the public was insufficient, as the CVs of shortlisted candidates were not published, and the justification based on POPIA was incorrect. The 14-day comment period was unreasonably short, and the use of an online form with a character limitation further restricted meaningful participation. These procedural deficiencies rendered the appointment process unconstitutional. The ap…

Source excerpt

• Public Participation
• Appointment Of Chapter 9 Commissioners
• Access To Information
• Protection Of Personal Information Act
• Remedial Orders
• Costs In Constitutional Litigation

Ntuli v S (128/2023)

Ntuli v S (128/2023) [2025] ZASCA 114 (30 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

128/2023

Judges

Matojane, Unterhalter, Koen, Coppin, Dawood

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the State did not indicate in the charge sheet, nor at any stage of the proceedings, that it intended to rely on the doctrine of common purpose in respect of the attempted murder counts. The evidence presented was contradictory regarding the appellant's direct participation, and the State's case was prosecuted on the basis of individual culpability. The full court erred in confirming the convictions by applying common purpose, as the appellant was not forewarned and could not properly defend himself against that basis for conviction. This amounted to a vi…

Source excerpt

• Common Purpose
• Fair Trial Rights
• Charge Sheet Requirements
• Minimum Sentences Act
• Bill Of Rights Limitation

Tridevco (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (62/2024)

Tridevco (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (62/2024) [2025] ZASCA 110 (23 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

62/2024

Judges

Nicholls, Unterhalter, Dawood, Vally, Norman

The majority held that the property does not meet the exclusion criteria under section 1(a) of SALA, as it is not situated in an area where a local area committee was established, despite its inclusion in the Peri-Urban Town Planning Scheme. The Minister's refusal to consent to subdivision was based on the property's high agricultural potential and the need to preserve land for food security, which aligns with the purpose of SALA. However, the Minister failed to consult with the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, whose development plans and constitutional obligations could be thwarted by t…

Source excerpt

• Subdivision Of Agricultural Land Act
• Statutory Interpretation
• Municipal Consultation
• Constitutional Duties Of Minister
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Local Government Planning

Burgerbrug Beleggings (Pty) Ltd v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (20135/2022)

Burgerbrug Beleggings (Pty) Ltd v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality (20135/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 763 (21 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

20135/2022

Judge

L.T. Modiba

The court found that the City’s decision to issue contravention notices to Burgerbrug constitutes administrative action under PAJA, as it is a demand with direct legal effect. However, Burgerbrug failed to establish any grounds for review under PAJA, as it did not demonstrate that the City acted unlawfully or irrationally in issuing the notices. The owner’s duty to secure its property and ensure compliance with planning and building regulations is affirmed, and the municipality’s enforcement powers are not displaced by the owner’s absence or neglect. The court rejected Burgerbrug’s constituti…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Municipal Land Use Regulation
• Owner Liability For Unlawful Development
• Constitutional Invalidity Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Non Joinder Of Interested Parties