Gumede and Another v Small Enterprise Development Agency and Another (5670/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1228 (22 November 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
5670/2023
Judge
J M Matsemela
The High Court held that the respondents complied with the Public Protector’s remedial action and dismissed the applicants’ claim for constitutional damages and costs.
P. v Housing Development Agency (21/50612) [2024] ZAGPJHC 234 (4 March 2024)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
21/50612
Judge
C. A. C. Korf
The court held that the defendant's exception to Claim A, based on COIDA, could not be upheld at the exception stage because the applicability of COIDA requires a factual determination that cannot be made solely on the pleadings. The defendant must plead COIDA as a defence and bear the onus of proving its applicability. Regarding Claim B, the court found that constitutional damages are not available in addition to common law damages arising from the same facts, as established by Fose and subsequent case law. The plaintiff failed to plead facts demonstrating that constitutional damages are the…
Source excerpt
Compensation For Occupational Injuries And Diseases Act
Seale and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Another (Leave to Appeal) (2023-078684) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1149 (8 September 2023)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
2023-078684
Judge
WJ du Plessis
The High Court dismissed leave to appeal after finding no reasonable prospects of success against an order restoring homes and interdicting unlawful eviction.
Upper Highway Air NPC v Enviroserv Waste Management (Pty) Ltd and Others (3692/2017) [2018] ZAKZDHC 37 (31 July 2018)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
3692/2017
Judge
Koen
The court held that while the plaintiff's particulars of claim are lengthy and sometimes narrative, most of the exceptions raised by the defendants do not strike at the root of the claim and can be pleaded to meaningfully. However, certain paragraphs are vague and embarrassing, specifically where the plaintiff fails to identify the written instructions, statutory and regulatory provisions, by-laws, and directions relied upon, and where the extent of the alleged common law duty of care is not pleaded. The court found that declarations regarding fitness and propriety for licensing purposes are…
South African Medical Association obo Pietz v Department of Health - Gauteng Province and Others (JR2343/12) [2016] ZALCJHB 27 (29 January 2016)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JR2343/12
Judge
Rhoodie
The Labour Court granted leave to appeal after finding reasonable prospects that another court might reach a different conclusion on compensation and constitutional relief.
Sali v National Commissioner of the South African Police Service and Others (CCT 164/13) [2014] ZACC 19; [2014] 9 BLLR 827 (CC); 2014 (9) BCLR 997 (CC); (2014) 35 ILJ 2727 (CC) (19 June 2014)
The Constitutional Court held that the refusal to appoint the applicant as a permanent member of SAPS on the basis of age constituted unfair discrimination under section 6(1) of the Employment Equity Act. The age requirement set by the National Commissioner did not form part of the Regulations, as only the Minister has the power to amend Regulations. The discrimination was based on an employment policy or practice, not legislation, and the respondents failed to justify the discrimination as fair. The applicant passed all required tests and met the experience requirement. The constitutional ch…
Maleka and Another v Nedbank Ltd and Others (23766/2008) [2013] ZAGPPHC 183 (3 July 2013)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
23766/2008
Judge
Kubushi
The court found that the sale in execution and subsequent transfer of the applicants' residential property were invalid because the warrant of execution was issued without the judicial oversight required by section 26 of the Constitution and the principles established in Jaftha v Schoeman. The court held that the applicants' right to adequate housing was infringed, as the court did not consider all relevant circumstances before issuing the writ, especially given the lapse of four years since the original order. The absence of judicial oversight rendered both the warrant and the sale in execut…
V.S.M and Another v Minister of Police of the Government of the Republic of South Africa (68/2012) [2013] ZAGPPHC 201; 2013 (5) SA 622 (GNP) (3 July 2013)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
68/2012
Judge
S P Mothle
The court finds that the right to family care or parental care under section 28(1)(b) of the Constitution is a constitutional right deserving of protection and enforcement. The Children’s Act provides a broader definition of care, encompassing more than financial support. South African law recognises constitutional damages as appropriate relief for infringement of constitutional rights. The Plaintiffs are entitled to claim constitutional damages on behalf of the minor children for the unlawful deprivation of their father’s parental care due to the proven unlawful conduct of the Defendant’s em…
Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Von Abo (283/10) [2011] ZASCA 65; (2011 (5) SA 262 (SCA); [2011] 3 All SA 261 (SCA) (4 April 2011)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
283/10
Judges
Mpati, Cloete, Snyders, Theron, Plasket
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court's orders compelling the government to provide diplomatic protection and pay damages for losses caused by the Zimbabwean government were legally untenable. Diplomatic protection is a matter of executive discretion, and while citizens have a right to request such protection and to have their requests considered rationally and in good faith, there is no constitutional obligation on the government to provide a particular form of protection or to secure restitution from a foreign state. The orders violated the separation of powers by prescribing…
