South Africa Case Law

E.TV (Pty) Limited and Others v Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies and Others (2025/008928)

E.TV (Pty) Limited and Others v Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies and Others (2025/008928) [2025] ZAGPPHC 321 (27 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025/008928

Judge

BAQWA

The Court found that the decision to set the analogue switch-off date for 31 March 2025 was taken by Cabinet, not the Minister, contrary to statutory and constitutional requirements. The Minister failed to consult stakeholders regarding the actual proposed date, as required by law and the Constitutional Court's precedent. The evidence showed that hundreds of thousands of households would be left without access to television, violating their rights to freedom of expression and equality. The Minister's justification for the limitation of rights was found to be irrational and retrogressive. The…

Source excerpt

• Analogue Switch Off
• Digital Migration
• Freedom Of Expression
• Consultation Requirements
• Legitimate Expectation
• Interim Interdict

Telkom SA Soc Limited and Another v Independent Communications Authority of South Africa and Others (66778/2020)

Telkom SA Soc Limited and Another v Independent Communications Authority of South Africa and Others (66778/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 120 (8 March 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

66778/2020

Judge

BAQWA

The High Court granted Telkom and e.tv interim relief stopping ICASA’s spectrum ITA process pending review, finding the change in approach unlawful and irrational.

• Spectrum Licensing
• Procedural Fairness
• Digital Migration
• Interim Interdict
• Irrationality
• Audi Alteram Partem

e.tv (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Communications and Others (34694/2012)

e.tv (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Communications and Others (34694/2012) [2012] ZAGPJHC 268 (1 December 2012)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

34694/2012

Judge

Pretorius GC

The court held that the Minister of Communications did not have the legal authority under the Electronic Communications Act or any other legislation to instruct Sentech to assume responsibility for the set top box control system for free-to-air digital terrestrial television. The Minister's powers are limited to policy development, and regulatory authority is vested in ICASA. The decision was not a valid exercise of executive power and, even if considered administrative action, was procedurally flawed as e.tv and SABC were not afforded an opportunity to make representations. The International…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Ministerial Powers
• Broadcasting Regulation
• Digital Migration
• Set Top Box Control