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
Constitutional Law [2014] ZAECMHC 27

Mphalala v South African Security Agency (684/2011)

Mphalala v South African Security Agency (684/2011) [2014] ZAECMHC 27 (5 June 2014)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha
Case number
684/2011
Judge
L.P Pakade

The applicant's disability grant was approved for a limited period of 12 months, as evidenced by the respondent's letter dated 25 August 2008. The applicant was informed of the temporary nature of the grant, and its termination occurred by effluxion of time, not by unilateral or unlawful action. The applicant and her attorneys were made aware of the approval letter prior to launching the application. There was no procedural unfairness or violation of the applicant's constitutional right to social security, as the respondent acted within the bounds of the Social Assistance Act and the Constitu…

Source excerpt

  • Social Assistance
  • Disability Grant Termination
  • Constitutional Right To Social Security
  • Procedural Fairness
  • Costs In Constitutional Litigation
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2005] ZAECHC 6

Matinese v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Welfare, Eastern Cape (ECJ 005/2005)

Matinese v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Welfare, Eastern Cape (ECJ 005/2005) [2005] ZAECHC 6 (10 February 2005)

Court
High Courts - Eastern Cape
Case number
ECJ 005/2005
Judge
LEACH

The court found that the applicant's disability grant was unlawfully terminated without proper notice or a hearing, in contravention of the relevant regulations and principles of natural justice. The respondent failed to provide written reasons for the suspension or inform the applicant of her right to apply for restoration within 90 days, as required by regulation 23. The respondent's affidavit was deficient and failed to genuinely dispute the applicant's factual averments. The court held that review proceedings in the High Court were necessary, as the Magistrates' Court would lack jurisdict…

Source excerpt

  • Social Assistance Act
  • Disability Grant Termination
  • Procedural Fairness
  • Judicial Review
  • Mora Interest
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.