Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Criminal Law [2012] ZAGPPHC 320

McMaster v Director of Public Prosecution and Others (69021/2012)

McMaster v Director of Public Prosecution and Others (69021/2012) [2012] ZAGPPHC 320 (28 November 2012)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
69021/2012
Judge
A.M.L. Phatudi

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to comply with the practice directive for urgent applications and did not present evidence warranting extreme urgency. The magistrate acted lawfully in postponing the bail hearing under section 50(6)(d) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The High Court is bound by the principle that it should not impose duties on magistrates or police officials beyond those provided by law. This application was neither an appeal nor a review of the magistrate's decision, and the relief sought was not competent. Accordingly, the application was dismissed a…

Source excerpt

  • Bail Application
  • Urgent Interdict
  • Criminal Procedure Act Section 50
  • Court Powers
  • Practice Directives
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [1997] ZACC 7

Minister of Justice v Ntuli (CCT15/97, CCT17/95)

Minister of Justice v Ntuli (CCT15/97, CCT17/95) [1997] ZACC 7; 1997 (6) BCLR 677; 1997 (3) SA 772 (5 June 1997)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT15/97, CCT17/95
Judges
Chaskalson P, Ackermann, Didcott, Kriegler, Langa, Madala, Mokgoro, O'Regan

The Constitutional Court held that, even assuming it has the power to vary a final order suspending a declaration of invalidity, such power should be exercised sparingly and only for good cause. In this case, the government had almost 18 months to remedy the defect in section 309(4)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act but failed to act with the required urgency. The delays were inexcusable and resulted from departmental neglect, not the complexity of the remedial action. Further suspension would perpetuate the violation of fundamental rights and undermine constitutional values of equality and th…

Source excerpt

  • Declaration Of Invalidity
  • Suspension Of Invalidity
  • Right Of Appeal
  • Equality Before Law
  • Court Powers
  • Just And Equitable Orders
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.