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
Xulu v Minister of Defence and Another (A468/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 310 (1 March 2017)
The High Court held that the SANDF unlawfully refused to renew a fixed-term contract, ignored its own procedures, and extended the contract to July 2017.
Minister of Safety and Security v Booysen (2915/2013) [2015] ZAECGHC 100 (6 October 2015)
The High Court refused leave to appeal in a vicarious liability case, holding that subjective trust by the victim is not an essential element in deviation cases.
Minister of Safety and Security v Morudu (1084/2013) [2015] ZASCA 91; 2016 (1) SACR 68 (SCA) (29 May 2015)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Minister of Safety and Security is not vicariously liable for the unlawful killing committed by Inspector Duba. The court found that Duba's actions were motivated solely by personal reasons, constituting a radical deviation from his employment duties. None of the respondents identified Duba as a policeman or reposed trust in him; he was dressed in civilian clothing, used his own firearm, and the police vehicle was unmarked. The area he travelled to was not within his assigned duty area, and he was not dispatched to a crime scene. The court distinguish…
Source excerpt
Mukhamadiva v Director_General Department of Home Affairs and Another (22621/2011) [2012] ZAWCHC 337 (23 October 2012)
The court found that the Department of Home Affairs' approach, as articulated by Mr Mellet, was legally flawed and constitutionally unsound. The assertion that international transit zones at airports are exempt from South African law and court orders is unsupported by the Convention of International Civil Aviation, Annex 9, or any South African statute. Both international and domestic case law confirm that the Bill of Rights and the jurisdiction of South African courts extend to all persons within the country's territory, including those in airport transit zones. The Department's policy, whic…
Source excerpt
Jesse v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development NO and Others (15349/2010) [2011] ZAKZDHC 73 (18 October 2011)
The court dismissed an application seeking to review a High Court judge’s order and challenge Uniform Rule 49, holding the proper remedy was appeal.
Maneli v Maneli (14/3/2-234/05) [2010] ZAGPJHC 22; 2010 (7) BCLR 703 (GSJ) (19 April 2010)
The court held that a child adopted under Xhosa customary law was entitled to maintenance, and ordered registration of the adoption and a maintenance enquiry.
Mayongo v Refugee Appeal Board and Others (16491/06) [2007] ZAGPHC 17 (4 April 2007)
The High Court set aside the Refugee Appeal Board’s refusal of refugee status and granted the applicant asylum, finding compelling reasons based on past persecution and medical evidence.
Amod v Multilateral Motor Vehicle Accidents Fund (CCT4/98) [1998] ZACC 11; 1998 (4) SA 753; 1998 (10) BCLR 1207 (27 August 1998)
The Constitutional Court held that although the issues raised were important and warranted the attention of a higher court, the appeal should first be dealt with by the Supreme Court of Appeal, not directly by the Constitutional Court. The Supreme Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to develop the common law in accordance with both the interim and 1996 Constitutions, including deciding whether such development applies to causes of action arising before the Constitutions came into force. The Constitutional Court emphasised that its jurisdiction to develop the common law in constitutional matters…
Source excerpt
S v Pennington and Another (CCT14/97) [1997] ZACC 10; 1997 (10) BCLR 1413; 1997 (4) SA 1076 (18 September 1997)
The Constitutional Court held that, pending the enactment of enabling legislation or rules, appeals from the Supreme Court of Appeal on constitutional matters may only be brought with the leave of the Constitutional Court. The Court has the inherent power to regulate its own process in the interests of justice, and it is appropriate to require leave to appeal to prevent abuse and delay. The Bill of Rights in the 1996 Constitution does not apply retroactively to criminal trials completed before its commencement; the fairness of such trials must be judged according to the law in force at the ti…
Source excerpt
Explore more
