South Africa Case Law

Ndamase v Commissioner: Private Inquiry into the affairs of SNS Holdings (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Others (2023-019694)

Ndamase v Commissioner: Private Inquiry into the affairs of SNS Holdings (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Others (2023-019694) [2024] ZAGPPHC 407 (13 May 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023-019694

Judge

YVAN COERTZEN

The High Court dismissed a review of a s 417 and 418 company inquiry summons, holding the requested documents were relevant and no bias or privacy breach was shown.

• Companies Act 1973 Section 417 And 418
• Liquidation Inquiry
• Summons And Subpoena
• Right To Privacy
• Apprehension Of Bias
• Freedom Of Religion

Solidariteit Helpende Hand NPC and Others v Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (104/2022)

Solidariteit Helpende Hand NPC and Others v Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (104/2022) [2023] ZASCA 35 (31 March 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

104/2022

Judges

Saldulker, Nicholls, Mabindla-Boqwana, Weiner, Olsen

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the challenge to COVID-19 religious-gathering regulations was moot because the regulations had already been repealed.

• Mootness
• Disaster Management Act
• Freedom Of Religion
• Regulations Review
• Interests Of Justice
• Covid-19-regulations

Madrasah Taleemuddeen Islamic Institute v Chandra Giri Ellaurie and Another (755/2021)

Madrasah Taleemuddeen Islamic Institute v Chandra Giri Ellaurie and Another (755/2021) [2022] ZASCA 160; 2023 (2) SA 143 (SCA) (24 November 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

755/2021

Judges

Dambuza, Gorven, Hughes, Musi, Daffue

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent failed to meet the legal requirements for a final interdict. The evidence presented was based on personal aversion to Islam and did not objectively demonstrate unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of property. The court reaffirmed that the standard for nuisance is objective and must be assessed from the perspective of a reasonable person in the neighbourhood, not someone with extraordinary sensitivity or personal prejudice. The Constitution protects both religious belief and its manifestation, and these rights must be balanced in nu…

Source excerpt

• Nuisance
• Freedom Of Religion
• Interdict
• Reasonableness Standard
• Constitutional Rights Balance

Mahlangu v Du Plessis; Du Plessis v Mahlangu and Another (LCC97/2021)

Mahlangu v Du Plessis; Du Plessis v Mahlangu and Another (LCC97/2021) [2022] ZALCC 9 (30 March 2022)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC97/2021

Judge

Flatela

The Land Claims Court granted leave to appeal in a dispute over an occupier’s drum beating and cultural ceremonies, balancing ESTA rights against nuisance and property concerns.

• Extension Of Security Of Tenure Act
• Freedom Of Religion
• Nuisance
• Property Rights
• Noise Regulation
• Esta

Ellaurie v Madrasah Taleemuddeen Islamic Institute and Another (3848/2019)

Ellaurie v Madrasah Taleemuddeen Islamic Institute and Another (3848/2019) [2020] ZAKZDHC 32; 2021 (2) SA 163 (KZD) (21 August 2020)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

3848/2019

Judge

Mngadi

The court granted a limited interdict against audible calls to prayer reaching the applicant’s home, but refused broader relief seeking to ban the Madrasah.

• Nuisance
• Freedom Of Religion
• Interdict
• Use And Enjoyment Of Property
• Freedom-of-religion
• Property-rights

Mohamed and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (21402/20)

Mohamed and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (21402/20) [2020] ZAGPPHC 120; [2020] 2 All SA 844 (GP); 2020 (7) BCLR 865 (GP); 2020 (5) SA 553 (GP) (30 April 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

21402/20

Judge

Neukircher

The court held that the lockdown regulations, though imposing severe limitations on constitutional rights including freedom of religion, movement, and association, are reasonable and justifiable under section 36 of the Constitution in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The regulations are time-bound, based on expert advice, and designed to protect life, dignity, and access to healthcare by limiting social contact and preventing the healthcare system from being overwhelmed. The applicants' request for exemptions for religious gatherings would pose significant risks to public health, be impo…

Source excerpt

• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Freedom Of Religion
• Disaster Management Act
• Lockdown Regulations
• Proportionality Analysis

Freedom of Religion South Africa v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (CCT320/17)

Freedom of Religion South Africa v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others (CCT320/17) [2019] ZACC 34; 2019 (11) BCLR 1321 (CC); 2020 (1) SA 1 (CC); 2020 (1) SACR 113 (CC) (18 September 2019)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 320/17

Judges

Mogoeng, Basson, Cameron, Dlodlo, Froneman, Goliath, Khampepe, Mhlantla, Petse, Theron

The Constitutional Court held that the common law defence of reasonable and moderate parental chastisement is inconsistent with the Constitution. The defence unjustifiably limits children’s rights to dignity and to be protected from all forms of violence under sections 10 and 12(1)(c). The Court found that any application of force by a parent to a child, even if moderate and reasonable, constitutes violence and assault. The paramountcy of the best interests of the child requires that children be protected from all forms of violence, and the availability of less restrictive, non-violent discip…

Source excerpt

• Reasonable And Moderate Chastisement
• Best Interests Of The Child
• Freedom Of Religion
• Assault
• Limitation Of Rights
• Parental Authority

Gaum and Others v Van Rensburg NO and Others (40819/17)

Gaum and Others v Van Rensburg NO and Others (40819/17) [2019] ZAGPPHC 52; [2019] 2 All SA 722 (GP) (8 March 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

40819/17

Judges

T.J. Raulinga, S. Potterill, D.S. Molefe

The court set aside the Dutch Reformed Church’s 2016 decision on same-sex relationships, finding it procedurally invalid and unfairly discriminatory.

• Unfair Discrimination
• Freedom Of Religion
• Church Autonomy
• Same Sex Marriage
• Equality Clause
• Judicial Review

Cape Conference of the Seventh Day Adventist Church and Others v Magalela and Others (5385-2016)

Cape Conference of the Seventh Day Adventist Church and Others v Magalela and Others (5385-2016) [2017] ZAECGHC 68 (1 June 2017)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

5385/2016

Judge

NG Beshe

The High Court confirmed an interdict only against the first respondent for disrupting church services, but refused relief against the other respondents for lack of individual evidence.

• Final Interdict
• Freedom Of Religion
• Locus Standi
• Group Liability
• Constitutional Rights
• Church Disputes

Member Of The Executive Council Responsible For The Department of Health, Limpopo v Rabalago and Another (5727/2016)

Member Of The Executive Council Responsible For The Department of Health, Limpopo v Rabalago and Another (5727/2016) [2017] ZALMPPHC 51; 2018 (4) SA 270 (LP) (20 March 2017)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

5727/2016

Judge

M.G Phatudi

The court held that while the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, belief, and opinion, these rights are not absolute and may be limited by law of general application in the public interest. The respondents' practice of spraying Doom insecticide on congregants posed significant health risks, as evidenced by scientific and medical warnings. The court found that such practices offend public interest and constitutional values, and that the limitation of religious freedom in this context is reasonable and justifiable under section 36 of the Constitution. The court confirmed the interim in…

Source excerpt

• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Freedom Of Religion
• Interdict
• Public Health And Safety