South Africa Case Law

Pine Glow Investments (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Energy and Others (1264/2023)

Pine Glow Investments (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Energy and Others (1264/2023) [2025] ZASCA 75; [2025] 3 All SA 314 (SCA) (2 June 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1264/2023

Judges

Zondi DP, Mocumie JA, Mokgohloa JA, Koen JA, Molitsoane AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Minister could lawfully remit fuel licence applications for re-evaluation and that the review was premature for failure to exhaust internal remedies.

• Petroleum Products Act
• Internal Remedies
• Administrative Action
• Exhaustion Of Remedies
• Functus Officio
• Procedural Fairness

Mmamothama v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (2024/023448)

Mmamothama v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (2024/023448) [2025] ZAGPPHC 685 (29 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2024/023448

Judge

Swanepoel

The court found that the Appeal Tribunal acted outside its powers by determining causation, which is a function reserved for the courts. The Tribunal failed to consider the WPI assessment, which was above the statutory threshold for serious injury, and instead focused solely on the narrative test. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by irrelevant considerations and ignored relevant ones, rendering the decision reviewable under PAJA. The Supreme Court of Appeal has categorically held that the Tribunal cannot have the final say on causation. Accordingly, the Tribunal's decision to reject the…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Road Accident Fund Act
• Serious Injury Assessment
• Judicial Review
• Causation
• Administrative Action

Ngiriyabandi v Border Management Authority of South Africa and Others (2025/013010)

Ngiriyabandi v Border Management Authority of South Africa and Others (2025/013010) [2025] ZAWCHC 222 (27 May 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2025/013010

Judge

Nuku

The High Court dismissed an urgent application to set aside a refusal of entry, holding that administrative action cannot be undone by interdict without review proceedings.

• Interdict
• Administrative Action
• Internal Appeal
• Immigration Act
• Review Proceedings
• Administrative-law

Millstock Cars (Pty) Ltd v National Consumer Commission and Another (NCT/371633/2025/101(1))

Millstock Cars (Pty) Ltd v National Consumer Commission and Another (NCT/371633/2025/101(1)) [2025] ZANCT 27 (6 April 2025)

Court

National Consumer Tribunal

Case number

NCT/371633/2025/101(1)

Judges

S Hockey, C Sassman, CJ Ntsoane

The Tribunal cancelled a compliance notice after finding it was based on factual errors about a Ferrari’s defect and that only a faulty sensor was shown.

• Consumer Protection Act
• Compliance Notice Review
• Supplier Liability
• Defective Goods
• Administrative Action
• Consumer-protection-act

South African National Defence Union and Others v Chief of the South African National Defence Force and Others (Leave to Appeal) (46769/2020)

South African National Defence Union and Others v Chief of the South African National Defence Force and Others (Leave to Appeal) (46769/2020) [2025] ZAGPPHC 347 (28 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

46769/2020

Judge

Terblanche AJ

The court found that the applicants' fixed-term CSS contracts were not automatically extended by virtue of the reinstatement order or the Defence Force's policy. The contracts had expired prior to the relevant judgment, and the absence of a formal application for non-renewal did not result in automatic extension. The dictum in Xulu relied upon by the applicants was not part of the ratio decidendi and did not support their case. The court held that there was no reasonable prospect of success on appeal, nor any compelling reason to grant leave. The applicants misconceived their remedy, which sh…

Source excerpt

• Fixed Term Contracts
• Automatic Renewal
• Administrative Action
• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Orders

Tshetlo v Tsomele and Others (2023/125901)

Tshetlo v Tsomele and Others (2023/125901) [2025] ZAGPJHC 335 (26 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/125901

Judge

A Mitchell

The Master’s decision to recall and cancel the applicant’s letters of executorship was invalid, as it was not based on any statutory grounds under section 54(1)(b) of the Administration of Estates Act and was not supported by facts or legal reasoning. The letters of executorship issued to the applicant remain valid and effective unless and until set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction. The applicant is entitled to reinstatement as executor and to costs, as she was substantially successful. Costs on the attorney and own client scale were not justified; party and party costs were awarded.

Source excerpt

• Administrative Action
• Removal Of Executor
• Review Of Master Decision
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act

Government Printing Works v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR849/21)

Government Printing Works v General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council and Others (JR849/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 132 (25 March 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR849/21

Judge

Daniels

The commissioner’s arbitration award was unreasonable and based on irrelevant considerations. The evidence did not support the existence of a reasonable expectation of renewal or permanent employment for the third respondent’s members. The applicant’s operational reasons for the fixed term contracts were fully explained and justified. The employment letters expressly excluded any expectation of permanent employment. The minutes of the Chamber meetings did not record any agreement for permanent employment, and the evidence of such an agreement was unsatisfactory and unsubstantiated. Section 19…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Reasonable Expectation
• Fixed Term Contracts
• Review Of Arbitration Award
• Condonation
• Administrative Action

Biskit (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (6156/2023)

Biskit (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Services (6156/2023) [2025] ZAFSHC 71 (13 March 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

6156/2023

Judges

P.J. Loubser, I. Van Rhyn

The High Court dismissed a review of SARS’s seizure of cigarettes, holding the applicant failed to prove excise duty had been paid and the seizure was fair.

• Customs And Excise Act
• Search And Seizure
• Presumption Of Duty Unpaid
• Procedural Fairness
• Administrative Action
• Onus Of Proof

Mbuyisa v HOD: Free State Department of Social Development and Others (3243/2024)

Mbuyisa v HOD: Free State Department of Social Development and Others (3243/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 79 (13 March 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3243/2024

Judges

Mbhele, Opperman

The court held that the applicant's precautionary suspension was not an administrative action requiring judicial review and setting aside. The employment relationship between the applicant and the respondents was contractual and did not fall within the scope of administrative action as defined by the Constitution and relevant case law. The applicant's challenge did not raise a genuine constitutional issue, and the Biowatch-rule did not apply. The application for leave to appeal had no reasonable prospects of success, and the costs order was justified given the absence of a constitutional issu…

Source excerpt

• Costs In Constitutional Litigation
• Biowatch Rule
• Precautionary Suspension
• Administrative Action
• Prospects Of Success

Foursight IT Business Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Department of Home Affairs and Another (024313/23)

Foursight IT Business Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Department of Home Affairs and Another (024313/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 248 (3 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

024313/23

Judge

GN Moshoana

The High Court dismissed Foursight’s challenge to the cancellation of its IT services contract, holding the pleaded case was not a PAJA review and no damages claim was before it.

• Declaratory Relief
• Specific Performance
• Contract Cancellation
• Administrative Action
• Treasury Regulations
• Fraud