South Africa Case Law

Solidarity Trade Union and Others v Minister of Health and Others (61844/2021)

Solidarity Trade Union and Others v Minister of Health and Others (61844/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 677; [2024] 4 All SA 264 (GP); 2024 (11) BCLR 1451 (GP); 2024 (6) SA 639 (GP) (24 July 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

61844/2021

Judge

Millar

The court found that sections 36 to 40 of the National Health Act 61 of 2003 (Certificate of Need scheme) are unconstitutional. The scheme infringes several constitutional rights, including dignity, freedom of movement and residence, choice of trade, property rights, and access to healthcare. It imposes impermissible barriers to entry and continued operation for private healthcare providers and establishments, with retrospective effect and no guarantee of renewal. The scheme enables arbitrary deprivation and expropriation of property without compensation or fair process, and compels resource…

Source excerpt

• Certificate Of Need
• National Health Act
• Limitation Of Rights
• Expropriation
• Access To Healthcare
• Property Deprivation

Member of the executive Council for Health and Social Development of the Gauteng Provincial Government v Zulu obo Zulu (1020/2015)

Member of the executive Council for Health and Social Development of the Gauteng Provincial Government v Zulu obo Zulu (1020/2015) [2016] ZASCA 185 (30 November 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1020/2015

Judges

Maya, Swain, Fourie, Dlodlo, Potterill

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the common law 'once and for all' rule precludes the appellant's request for payment of future medical expenses as and when required, and that there was no evidence that the rule compromises the constitutional right of access to healthcare or the best interests of the child. The court found that any development of the common law in this regard would be substantive and is more appropriately addressed by the legislature. The court further held that the amount awarded for future medical expenses cannot be excluded from the calculation of contingency fees und…

Source excerpt

• Once And For All Rule
• Future Medical Expenses
• Contingency Fee Agreements
• Development Of Common Law
• Children S Rights
• Access To Healthcare

AB and Another v Minister of Social Development As Amicus Curiae: Centre for Child Law (40658/13)

AB and Another v Minister of Social Development As Amicus Curiae: Centre for Child Law (40658/13) [2015] ZAGPPHC 580; [2015] 4 All SA 24 (GP); 2015 (10) BCLR 1228 (GP); 2016 (2) SA 27 (GP) (12 August 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

40658/13

Judge

AC Basson

The High Court struck down the Children’s Act genetic-link requirement for surrogacy, finding it unconstitutional discrimination against conception-infertile persons.

• Genetic Link Requirement
• Surrogacy Motherhood Agreements
• Equality Rights
• Reproductive Autonomy
• Human Dignity
• Access To Healthcare