South Africa Case Law

Public Protector of South Africa v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (8500/2022)

Public Protector of South Africa v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (8500/2022) [2022] ZAWCHC 197; [2023] 1 All SA 256 (WCC); 2023 (4) SA 205 (WCC) (11 October 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8500/2022

Judges

L G Nuku, M Francis, JD Lekhuleni

The High Court held that the President’s suspension of the Public Protector was conduct of the President requiring Constitutional Court confirmation.

• Presidential Conduct
• Chapter 9 Institutions
• Declaration Of Invalidity
• Confirmation Proceedings
• Suspension Pending Appeal
• Constitutional-law

Ambassador Duty Free (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others (28368/2021; 32175/2021)

Ambassador Duty Free (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Finance and Others (28368/2021; 32175/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 7 (17 January 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

28368/2021; 32175/2021

Judge

D S Fourie

The High Court is bound by the Constitutional Court's decision in Prince, which holds that it is neither necessary nor competent for a High Court to suspend a declaration of invalidity relating to an Act of Parliament, as such orders require confirmation by the Constitutional Court and have no force unless confirmed. The Court found that the Schedules to the Customs Act and VAT Act, even as amended, remain part of the Act of Parliament and thus any declaration of invalidity regarding these Schedules also requires confirmation. The Court declined to grant immediate prospective effect to the de…

Source excerpt

• Delegation Of Legislative Power
• Declaration Of Invalidity
• Confirmation Proceedings
• Customs And Excise
• Value Added Tax
• Prospective And Suspended Orders

Herbert NO and Others v Senqu Municipality and Others (2457/2016)

Herbert NO and Others v Senqu Municipality and Others (2457/2016) [2018] ZAECGHC 92; [2018] 4 All SA 677 (ECG) (11 October 2018)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

2457/2016

Judge

T Malusi

The court found that section 1 of the Land Affairs General Amendment Act 61 of 1998 and section 25A of the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act 112 of 1991, to the extent that they exclude section 3 from application throughout the Republic, are inconsistent with sections 9 and 25 of the Constitution. The exclusionary provision creates arbitrary and unfair discrimination between holders of different categories of land tenure rights, lacks any rational basis, and perpetuates apartheid-era territorial distinctions. The exclusion also results in arbitrary deprivation of property, as the Trust and…

Source excerpt

• Equality Clause
• Arbitrary Deprivation Of Property
• Upgrading Of Land Tenure Rights Act
• Statutory Interpretation
• Severance Of Unconstitutional Provisions
• Confirmation Proceedings

Minister of Safety and Security v South African Hunters and Game Conservation Association (CCT177/17)

Minister of Safety and Security v South African Hunters and Game Conservation Association (CCT177/17) [2018] ZACC 14; 2018 (2) SACR 164 (CC); 2018 (10) BCLR 1268 (CC) (7 June 2018)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 177/17

Judges

Zondo, Cachalia, Dlodlo, Froneman, Goliath, Jafta, Petse, Theron

Sections 24 and 28 of the Firearms Control Act are not vague or irrational. The provisions clearly set out the requirements for renewal and termination of firearm licences, and the consequences of non-compliance are explicit. The licensing system is rationally connected to the legitimate purpose of controlling firearms and protecting constitutional rights to life and bodily integrity. The differentiation between categories of licence termination is rational and does not amount to unfair discrimination. Any deprivation of property occurs under other provisions, not the impugned sections, and i…

Source excerpt

• Firearms Control Act
• Vagueness And Rationality
• Equality Rights
• Deprivation Of Property
• Rule Of Law
• Confirmation Proceedings

Pieterse NO v Lephalale Local Municipality (CCT184/16)

Pieterse NO v Lephalale Local Municipality (CCT184/16) [2016] ZACC 40; 2017 (2) BCLR 233 (CC) (10 November 2016)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT184/16

Judges

Mogoeng, Nkabinde, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Mbha, Mhlantla, Musi, Zondo

The Constitutional Court confirmed that section 139 of the Town-planning and Townships Ordinance is unconstitutional because it lets a province appeal municipal planning decisions.

• Municipal Planning
• Separation Of Powers
• Provincial Interference
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Confirmation Proceedings
• Retrospective Effect

Uthukela District Municipality and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT7/02)

Uthukela District Municipality and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT7/02) [2002] ZACC 11; 2002 (11) BCLR 1220 ; 2003 (1) SA 678 (CC) (12 June 2002)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT7/02

Judges

Du Plessis AJ, Chaskalson CJ, Langa DCJ, Ackermann J, Goldstone J, Kriegler J, Madala J, Ngcobo J, O'Regan J, Sachs J, Skweyiya AJ

The Constitutional Court declined to confirm a High Court invalidity order about municipal revenue sharing after the law was repealed and the dispute was settled.

• Division Of Revenue
• Equitable Share
• Intergovernmental Dispute
• Cooperative Government
• Confirmation Proceedings
• Equitable-share