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
5 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 [2023] ZAECMKHC 64

Enoch Mgijima Municipality v Komani Protest Action (KPA) and Others (444/2023)

Enoch Mgijima Municipality v Komani Protest Action (KPA) and Others (444/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 64 (23 May 2023)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda
Case number
444/2023
Judge
T.V Norman

The court found that the respondents, while exercising their constitutional rights to protest, failed to comply with the Regulation of Gatherings Act by not giving proper written notice to the municipality. The respondents admitted to violent and unlawful conduct during the protests, including blockades and trashing of streets, which infringed on the rights of other citizens and disrupted municipal operations. The interim interdict sought and obtained was limited to restraining unlawful conduct, not peaceful protest. The court held that the applicant was justified in seeking urgent relief, bu…

Source excerpt

  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Interdicts
  • Regulation Of Gatherings Act
  • Service Delivery Protests
  • Municipal Governance
  • Balancing Of Rights
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2023] ZAECMKHC 62

Border-Kei Chamber Of Business and Another v Komani Protest Action Group ("KPA") and Others (442/2023)

Border-Kei Chamber Of Business and Another v Komani Protest Action Group ("KPA") and Others (442/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 62 (23 May 2023)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda
Case number
442/2023
Judge
T.V Norman

The court found that the respondents' conduct in forcing businesses to close during protest actions constituted unlawful interference with the applicants' right to trade. The threats, intimidation, and compilation of lists of businesses that remained open were clear evidence of conduct that went beyond lawful protest and amounted to coercion. The respondents failed to justify their actions or demonstrate any connection between the businesses and the service delivery obligations of the municipality. The applicants' right to trade continued to be under threat for as long as the protests persist…

Source excerpt

  • Interdictory Relief
  • Right To Trade
  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Balancing Of Rights
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2018] ZACC 45

Mlungwana and Others v S and Another (CCT32/18)

Mlungwana and Others v S and Another (CCT32/18) [2018] ZACC 45; 2019 (1) BCLR 88 (CC); 2019 (1) SACR 429 (CC) (19 November 2018)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 32/18
Judges
Basson AJ, Cameron J, Dlodlo AJ, Froneman J, Goliath AJ, Khampepe J, Mhlanthla J, Petse AJ, Theron J

Section 12(1)(a) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act 205 of 1993 imposes a criminal sanction on conveners who fail to give notice or give inadequate notice of gatherings, regardless of whether the gathering is peaceful and unarmed. This criminalisation constitutes a severe limitation of the right to freedom of assembly under section 17 of the Constitution, with a broad and chilling effect that deters the exercise of the right by both adults and children. The respondents failed to demonstrate that this limitation is justified under section 36, as the link between criminalisation and the preven…

Source excerpt

  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Regulation Of Gatherings Act
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
  • Criminalisation Of Peaceful Protest
  • Constitutional Invalidity
  • Remedies For Unconstitutional Legislation
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2018] ZAWCHC 3

Mlungwana and Others v S and Another (A431/15)

Mlungwana and Others v S and Another (A431/15) [2018] ZAWCHC 3; [2018] 2 All SA 183 (WCC); 2018 (1) SACR 538 (WCC) (24 January 2018)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
A431/15
Judges
Ndita, Magona

The court found that section 12(1)(a) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act, which criminalises convening a gathering of more than 15 people without prior notice, constitutes a limitation of the right to peaceful assembly under section 17 of the Constitution. The limitation is not reasonable or justifiable in an open and democratic society, as the criminal sanction is disproportionate to the legitimate purpose of regulating gatherings and facilitating police planning. The effect of a criminal conviction is severe and enduring, especially for vulnerable communities, and deters the exercise of co…

Source excerpt

  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Regulation Of Gatherings Act
  • Criminalisation Of Peaceful Protest
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
  • Constitutional Invalidity
  • Notice Requirement
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2017] ZACC 10

Hotz and Others v University of Cape Town (CCT280/16)

Hotz and Others v University of Cape Town (CCT280/16) [2017] ZACC 10; 2017 (7) BCLR 815 (CC); 2018 (1) SA 369 (CC) (12 April 2017)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 280/16
Judges
Nkabinde, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Mbha, Mhlantla, Musi, Zondo

The Constitutional Court held that while the applicants' conduct during the protest went beyond the boundaries of peaceful and non-violent demonstration, the High Court failed to properly situate its costs order within the constitutional context. The issues raised by the applicants were of genuine constitutional import, and their opposition to the University's application was neither frivolous nor vexatious. The High Court did not exercise its discretion judicially by failing to consider the chilling effect of an adverse costs order on constitutional litigation. The Supreme Court of Appeal al…

Source excerpt

  • Costs In Constitutional Litigation
  • Judicial Discretion
  • Right To Education
  • Freedom Of Expression
  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Final Interdict
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2016] ZAFSHC 217

Tsoaeli and Others v S (A222/2015)

Tsoaeli and Others v S (A222/2015) [2016] ZAFSHC 217; 2018 (1) SACR 42 (FB) (17 November 2016)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A222/2015
Judges
Molemela, Moloi, Lekale

Section 12(1)(e) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act does not create an offence for attendees of a gathering for which no prior notice was given unless the gathering was specifically prohibited and such prohibition was communicated as contemplated in sections 3(2), 5, or 7 of the Act. The trial court erred in interpreting the provision to criminalise mere attendance. Such an interpretation violates the principle of legality, as the statute does not clearly and unequivocally define attendance at an unnotified gathering as a criminal offence. The historical context and constitutional rights to…

Source excerpt

  • Regulation Of Gatherings Act
  • Principle Of Legality
  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Statutory Interpretation
  • Nullum Crimen Sine Lege
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2013] ZACC 3

Pilane and Another v Pilane and Another (CCT 46/12)

Pilane and Another v Pilane and Another (CCT 46/12) [2013] ZACC 3; 2013 (4) BCLR 431 (CC) (28 February 2013)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 46/12
Judges
Skweyiya, Moseneke, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Van der Westhuizen, Zondo, Mogoeng, Nkabinde

The Constitutional Court held that the High Court erred in granting the three interdicts against the applicants. The respondents failed to establish a clear right to exclusive reference as a traditional authority, and did not prove actual or reasonably apprehended injury. The applicants' use of the term 'Motlhabe Tribal Authority' did not amount to an unlawful assumption of statutory authority, and their conduct was not shown to have caused confusion or injury to the respondents. The applicants' undertaking to refrain from using statutory language was sufficient to address any future concerns…

Source excerpt

  • Customary Law And Traditional Leadership
  • Freedom Of Expression
  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Interdict Requirements
  • Statutory Recognition Of Traditional Authorities
  • Rule Of Law
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2011] ZASCA 152

South African Transport & Allied Workers Union v Garvis & others (007/11)

South African Transport & Allied Workers Union v Garvis & others (007/11) [2011] ZASCA 152; 2011 (6) SA 382 (SCA); 2011 (12) BCLR 1249 (SCA); [2011] 4 All SA 475 (SCA); [2011] 12 BLLR 1151 (SCA); (2011) 32 ILJ 2426 (SCA) (27 September 2011)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
007/11
Judges
Navsa, Brand, Van Heerden, Mhlantla, Plasket

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that s 11(2)(b) of the Regulation of Gatherings Act is not unconstitutional. The statutory defence is not illusory or internally contradictory; it is structured to ensure that liability attaches only where organisers have failed to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm. The right to freedom of assembly under s 17 of the Constitution is protected only for peaceful and unarmed gatherings, and does not extend to unlawful conduct or riots. The evidence showed that the Act has not deterred public assembly or protest, and the defence in s 11(2)(b) is con…

Source excerpt

  • Freedom Of Assembly
  • Statutory Liability
  • Regulation Of Gatherings Act
  • Constitutional Limitation
  • Negligence
  • Reverse Onus
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.