Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Barnard and Another v Minister of Environmental Affairs and Others (9952/2019) [2025] ZAGPPHC 705 (14 July 2025)
The High Court held the State liable after a Working for Water herbicide treatment contaminated irrigation water and damaged crops on a Limpopo farm.
Jacobus Nicolaas van Coller t/a JN van Coller Boerdery v The Member of the Executive Council for Economic, Small Business Development, Tourism and Environmental Affairs, Free State and Another (5750/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 191 (26 June 2025)
The court found that the respondents failed to afford the applicant an opportunity to make representations regarding the identity of the applicant in the s 24G application, resulting in procedural unfairness. The conflicting information in the application forms created ambiguity as to whether the applicant was an individual or a firm, and the respondents did not resolve this by inviting further representations. The Constitution and PAJA require administrative action to be procedurally fair, and the respondents' failure to do so rendered their decision reviewable. The court declined to substit…
Source excerpt
Minister of Water and Sanitation and Another v Water Tribunal and Others (109636/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 624 (23 June 2025)
The High Court dismissed a review of a Water Tribunal decision, holding the application was instituted more than 180 days late under PAJA and could not proceed.
Tshipise Safaris (Pty) Ltd v TD Nhlamulo and His Mother Logistics and Business Enterprises (Pty) Ltd and Others (538/2022) [2025] ZALMPPHC 124 (19 June 2025)
The Court found that the Applicant had locus standi under both the National Environmental Management Act and the Constitution, despite not being the registered owner, due to its beneficial ownership and undisturbed possession. The First and Tenth Respondents were found to have continued mining activities unlawfully after the lapse of their permit, in contempt of previous court orders and statutory requirements. The Department of Mineral Resources and Energy and SAPS failed to enforce compliance notices and statutory obligations. The Respondents' points in limine, including non-joinder, lis pe…
Source excerpt
Endangered Wildlife Trust and Another v Director-General (Acting) Department of Water and Sanitation and Another (1165/2023) [2025] ZASCA 69 (29 May 2025)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appeal under section 149(1) of the National Water Act is strictly limited to questions of law. The grounds advanced by the appellants were found to be factual disputes disguised as legal issues, with only the interpretation of section 24 of the Act qualifying as a legal question. The Tribunal and High Court were found to have properly considered all relevant statutory factors, including the strategic importance of the mining area, socio-economic impacts, and environmental risks. The water use licence contained sufficient conditions to address post-clo…
Source excerpt
Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment and Others v Badenhorst N.O. and Others (1004/2023) [2025] ZASCA 68 (28 May 2025)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to review and set aside the environmental authorisations on grounds not raised in the internal appeal, as the respondents failed to exhaust internal remedies and did not apply for exemption under section 7(2)(c) of PAJA. The Court found that any procedural non-compliance in the granting of environmental authorisations was not material and did not prejudice any person, thus the authorisations remained valid under section 47A(1) of NEMA. The requirement for EMPrs is that they be submitted before deciding on authorisation,…
Source excerpt
Taljaard v Stanger N.O and Others (051740/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 434 (5 May 2025)
The High Court granted an urgent interim interdict preventing removal of 289 rare cycads pending further proceedings, and ordered disclosure of the third respondent’s contact details.
Phelelo and Others v Kgetlengrivier Local Municipality and Others (6521/24) [2025] ZANWHC 66 (2 April 2025)
The court found that the applicants failed to establish urgency as required by Rule 6(12)(b). The founding papers did not set out explicit circumstances or reasons why substantial redress could not be obtained in due course. The applicants delayed approaching the court despite being aware of the sewerage spillages for months, and their conduct amounted to self-created urgency. The relief sought was incoherent, conflating interim and final relief, and prejudicial to the respondents. The application was struck off the roll for want of urgency, and costs were awarded against the applicants on a…
Source excerpt
Mafube Business Forum and Others v Premier of the Free State Province and Others (A23/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 93 (25 March 2025)
Full bench upheld an appeal over Mafube’s sewerage pollution and non-compliance, granting declaratory, mandatory and supervisory relief.
Northern Cape Ranchers (CC) v Sol Plaatje Municipality and Others (118/2024) [2025] ZANCHC 25; [2025] 2 All SA 843 (NC) (24 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed contempt relief, granted a structured interdict on sewage discharge, and dismissed monetary claims arising from non-compliance.
Explore more
