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
Mbeki and Another v Calata and Others (005245/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 753 (1 August 2025)
The High Court dismissed Thabo Mbeki and Brigitte Mabandla’s bid to intervene, holding they lacked a direct and substantial interest in the main case.
Mogale and Another v Premier, North West Province and Another (M485/20) [2024] ZANWHC 169 (3 July 2024)
The court held that the applicants, having withdrawn the application after inviting the respondents to answer the case set out in the founding papers, are liable for the costs incurred by the respondents. The applicants failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for signing affidavits that allegedly did not reflect their instructions, and their attempt to rely on the Biowatch principle was rejected as inapplicable. The general rule that a withdrawing party pays costs applies, and no exceptional circumstances were present to justify a departure. The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of…
Source excerpt
Matlhake and Another v Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims and Others (M456/2019) [2024] ZANWHC 61 (6 March 2024)
The court found that the Commission acted arbitrarily and failed to comply with the principles of natural justice and the rule of law in conducting its inquiry and compiling its report. The extensions of the Commission's term were not validly made, and the proceedings were marred by procedural irregularities, lack of responsiveness, and improper conduct. The approval of the Commission's report by the Premier was premature and based on a flawed process. The relief sought regarding recusal and constitution of a new Commission was overtaken by events, as the Commission's term had ended. However,…
Source excerpt
Pilane and Others v Premier of the North West Province and Others - Application for Leave to Appeal (UM127/2020) [2023] ZANWHC 231 (14 December 2023)
The court found that the longstanding and complex nature of the chieftaincy dispute among the Bakgatla ba Kgafela, the constitutional and legislative issues raised, and the need for legal certainty justified granting leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal. The grounds advanced by the applicants, including the interpretation of the Premier's executive functions and the distinction between Kgosi and Interim Kgosi, were considered to raise substantial points of law and matters of public and national interest. The court held that the application for leave to appeal displayed more than a r…
Source excerpt
Johannesburg Fire Victims Support Group v City Of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2023-120529) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1431 (7 December 2023)
The court found that the applicant, as a voluntary association acting in the public interest, had locus standi to bring the application. The magistrate's decision on detention was interlocutory and did not preclude the High Court from granting interim relief. Deporting detained fire victims before the Khampepe Commission concludes would undermine the commission's work and breach section 6 of the Provincial Commissions Act and regulation 18 of the commission's terms of reference. The requirements for an urgent interim interdict were satisfied: the applicant established a prima facie right to p…
Source excerpt
Prudential Authority of the South African Reserve Bank v Msiza and Another (78587/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 624 (21 September 2021)
The High Court granted leave to appeal in a case about procedural fairness in an FSR Act investigation and whether an implicated person had a right to be heard.
Zuma v Office of the Public Protector and Others (1447/2018) [2020] ZASCA 138 (30 October 2020)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Mr Zuma's application for leave to appeal against the punitive costs order had no reasonable prospect of success. The high court exercised its discretion judicially and applied the correct legal principles in awarding personal and punitive costs against Mr Zuma, who acted in his personal capacity. The court found that Mr Zuma's conduct in launching and pursuing the review application was reckless, motivated by personal interests, and delayed the investigation into serious allegations of state capture. The attempt to appeal only the costs order, without ch…
Source excerpt
Matlou v South African Broadcasting Corporation and Others (70546/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 310 (7 June 2020)
The court held that the Commission's findings and recommendations are subject to legality review, not PAJA review, as they do not have direct external legal effect until implemented. The Commission failed to act fairly and within its terms of reference by not affording the applicant an opportunity to respond to allegations against him, breaching the principles of legality and fairness. The references to the applicant by name in the report and recommendations must be excised, but the general recommendations regarding HR audits remain intact. The applicant was only entitled to limited relief, a…
Source excerpt
President of the Republic of South Africa v Office of the Public Protector and Others (91139/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 747; 2018 (2) SA 100 (GP) ; [2018] 1 All SA 800 (GP); 2018 (5) BCLR 609 (GP) (13 December 2017)
The court held that the Public Protector's remedial action directing the President to appoint a commission of inquiry, headed by a judge selected by the Chief Justice, was lawful, rational, and appropriate. The Public Protector's constitutional powers are broad and include the ability to direct the President to exercise his powers where necessary to remedy state misconduct. The President's powers under section 84(2)(f) are not absolute and must be exercised within constitutional constraints. The Public Protector did not unlawfully delegate her investigatory powers; rather, she investigated th…
Source excerpt
Democratic Alliance v Zuma and Another (21029/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 612 (29 September 2017)
The High Court stayed a bid to compel President Zuma to implement the Public Protector’s remedial action pending review, citing the interests of justice.
Explore more
