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
M.M v Kiewiet (A193/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 411 (3 May 2024)
The High Court upheld an appeal against dismissal of a harassment protection-order application, holding that the CSOS Act did not oust magistrates’ court jurisdiction.
Klaas and Another v 19th Episcopal District: A.M.E Church and Others; Malefetse and Another v 19th Episcopal District: A.M.E Church and Others (30485/19; 30486/19) [2019] ZAGPJHC 351 (17 September 2019)
The court found that both the suspension and expulsion of the applicants from the AME Church were procedurally flawed and violated the principles of due process as set out in the church's code of discipline and the Constitution. The Judicial Council itself acknowledged the procedural defects and confirmed that the applicants' rights were infringed. The court rejected the respondents' argument that the suspension remained valid despite the flawed expulsion, holding that if the main disciplinary process was invalid, the suspension could not stand. The court further held that the second applican…
Source excerpt
Tindeli and Another v Government Employees Pension Fund (65787/17) [2019] ZAGPPHC 143 (6 May 2019)
The court found that the First Applicant failed to establish locus standi to act on behalf of the Second Applicant, as no supporting documentation or resolution was annexed to the founding affidavit. Proof of authority must be provided at the outset, not in reply. Furthermore, the applicants failed to cite or notify other government functionaries with a direct and substantial interest in the proceedings, such as the Minister of Finance or National Treasury. These procedural defects are dispositive and fatal to the application for class action certification. The application was therefore dismi…
Source excerpt
South African Veterinary Association v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (CCT27/18) [2018] ZACC 49; 2019 (2) BCLR 273 (CC); 2019 (3) SA 62 (CC) (5 December 2018)
The Court found that the National Assembly failed to facilitate public participation when inserting the word 'veterinarian' into section 22C(1)(a) of the Medicines and Related Substances Act, as no public hearings or invitations to affected groups occurred after the amendment. The National Council of Provinces and Provincial Legislatures also failed to provide reasonable notice and did not invite submissions from veterinary organisations. These failures breached sections 59(1)(a), 72(1)(a), and 118(1)(a) of the Constitution. The amendment was material, affecting the entire veterinary professi…
Source excerpt
Director-General for the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another v Mwelase and Others; Mwelase and Others v Director-General for the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another (306/17; 314/17) [2018] ZASCA 105; 2019 (2) SA 81 (SCA) (17 August 2018)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Director-General's failure to process or refer labour tenant applications under the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act was unlawful and inconsistent with constitutional obligations, specifically ss 10, 25(6), 33, 195, and 237. However, the Court found that the appointment of a special master by the Land Claims Court constituted judicial overreach, as it effectively transferred executive functions and budgetary responsibilities to a court-appointed outsider, which is not authorised by South African law. The Court emphasised that remedies must respect the…
Source excerpt
City of Johannesburg v Rand Properties (Pty) Limited and Others (10330/04 , 10331/04 , 10332/04 , 10333/04 , 24101/03 , 13835/04) [2006] ZAGPHC 21; 2007 (1) SA 78 (W); [2006] 2 All SA 240 (W); 2006 (6) BCLR 728 (W) (3 March 2006)
The court held that the City of Johannesburg failed to comply with its constitutional and statutory obligations to provide adequate housing to those in crisis or desperate need. The City's housing programme was found to be insufficient, lacking practical implementation and failing to address the needs of the most vulnerable. The court emphasised that eviction may not be ordered unless suitable alternative accommodation is provided, and that the City's reliance on statutory powers must be exercised subject to section 26(3) of the Constitution. The Applicant's failure to consult with occupiers…
Source excerpt
South African Veterinary Council and Another v Veterinary Defence Association (112/2002) [2003] ZASCA 27; [2003] 2 All SA 156 (SCA); 2003 (4) SA 546 (SCA); 2003 (7) BCLR 697 (SCA) (27 March 2003)
The court upheld setting aside a veterinary disciplinary finding made after the respondent did not testify, holding the tribunal used the wrong approach and the association had standing.
Explore more
