Bela-Bela Municipality and Others v Bela-Bela VTS (Pty) Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (10379/2023) [2024] ZALMPPHC 144 (11 October 2024)
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Case number
10379/2023
Judge
N. Gaisa
The High Court granted leave to appeal against its review order concerning Bela-Bela Municipality’s refusal to support a vehicle testing station application.
Mining and Environmental Justice Community of South Africa and Others v MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development, Land and Environmental Affairs and Others (1322/2021) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 48 (18 July 2024)
Court
Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga
Case number
1322/2021
Judge
M Moleleki
The High Court reviewed and set aside the MEC’s decision to exclude four properties from the Mabola Protected Environment, allowing mining to proceed.
Premier of the North West Province and Others v Kagisano Molopo Local Municipality and Others (CIV APP FB 01/2020) [2022] ZANWHC 7 (10 March 2022)
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Case number
CIV APP FB 01/2020
Judges
Hendricks, Petersen, Snyman
The Full Bench held that the fact that the North West Provincial Government was placed under administration by the national government in terms of section 100 of the Constitution did not divest it of its constitutional powers to intervene in municipalities under section 139(1)(b). Section 100 does not constitute a complete takeover by the national government, but rather enables co-governance and support to ensure compliance with constitutional obligations. The provincial government retains oversight powers over local government, and its executive and administrative structures remain in place.…
Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd v Lekwa Ratepayers Association and Others; Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd v Vaal River Development Association (Pty) Ltd and Others (870/2020) [2022] ZASCA 10; [2022] 1 All SA 642 (SCA); 2022 (4) SA 78 (SCA) (21 January 2022)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
870/2020
Judges
Dambuza, Van der Merwe, Gorven, Meyer, Kgoele
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Eskom, as an organ of state, was not constitutionally or statutorily permitted to unilaterally reduce bulk electricity supply to the Ngwathe and Lekwa municipalities to historic, contractually agreed NMD levels without first making every reasonable effort, in collaboration with the municipalities and other state role-players, to settle the intergovernmental disputes as required by the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act and section 41 of the Constitution. Eskom's decisions rendered the municipalities unable to fulfil their constitutional obligations…
Scheepers v South African Council for Educators and Others (4988/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 212 (29 July 2021)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
4988/2020
Judges
Loubser, Nekosie
The court set aside SACE’s decision to refer a complaint against a school principal for discipline, finding no independent investigation and procedural unfairness.
Maluti-A-Phofung Municipality v Eskom Holdings SOC Limited and Others (2719/2020) [2021] ZAFSHC 3 (15 January 2021)
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
2719/2020
Judge
Mhlambi
The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal or any compelling reason for the appeal to be heard. The order delivered on 9 October 2020 was interlocutory in nature and did not have the effect of a final judgment. The applicant did not establish that Eskom's execution steps were premature or in bad faith, nor did it show that the settlement agreement was improperly enforced or that it was entitled to its cancellation. The cooperative governance obligations under section 41 of the Constitution and the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Ac…
Equal Education and Another v Minister of Basic Education and Others (276/2016) [2018] ZAECBHC 6; [2018] 3 All SA 705 (ECB); 2018 (9) BCLR 1130 (ECB); 2019 (1) SA 421 (ECB) (19 July 2018)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho
Case number
276/2016
Judge
N Msizi
The Court held that regulation 4(5)(a) of the Regulations unlawfully limits the right to basic education by making the implementation of minimum norms and standards subject to the resources and cooperation of other government agencies. This qualification undermines the immediacy and enforceability of the right, renders government unaccountable, and is inconsistent with the Constitution, SASA, and the 2013 court order. The Minister failed to justify the limitation under section 36 of the Constitution and did not provide a rational basis for the prioritisation and exclusion mechanisms in the re…
Gcora and Others v Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality and Others (1414/16) [2016] ZAECPEHC 55 (30 August 2016)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Case number
1414/16
Judge
C Plasket
The court dismissed an irregular-proceedings application for lack of standing, holding the applicants were unrehabilitated insolvents and not parties to the review.
Federation of Governing Bodies for South African Schools (FEDSAS) v Member of the Executive Council for Education, Gauteng and Another (CCT 209/15) [2016] ZACC 14; 2016 (4) SA 546 (CC); 2016 (8) BCLR 1050 (CC) (20 May 2016)
The Constitutional Court held that the impugned regulations do not conflict with national legislation and are rational, reasonable, and justifiable. Provincial legislative competence in education allows for regulations that may differ from national law, provided they do not violate constitutional standards. The Court found that the regulations appropriately balance the powers of school governing bodies and provincial authorities, ensuring universal access to education and preventing unfair discrimination. The MEC is required to determine feeder zones for schools after consultation with stakeh…
Member of the Executive Council for Education, Gauteng and Another v Federation of Governing Bodies for South African Schools (20420/2014) [2015] ZASCA 149; [2015] 4 All SA 591 (SCA) (16 October 2015)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
20420/2014
Judges
Mpati, Navsa, Shongwe, Dambuza, Van der Merwe
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Gauteng regulations on admission of learners to public schools do not conflict with national or provincial legislation and are not ultra vires the enabling legislation. The regulations are within the powers conferred by s 11(1) of the GSEA and do not unjustifiably encroach on the autonomy of school governing bodies. The department retains ultimate control over admissions and capacity, subject to reasonable and procedurally fair exercise of its powers and good faith engagement with governing bodies. Regulation 2(2A) was found to be vague and incomprehe…
