Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
T.R v Z.D.R and Others (93454/2015) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1343 (20 December 2024)
Leave to appeal was refused after the court found no reasonable prospects of success in a rescission dispute arising from a divorce settlement and costs order.
J.J and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (3626/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 286 (12 September 2024)
The court found that section 26(1)(a)-(c) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 51 of 1992 and Regulation 18(2)(a) of the Regulations on the Registration of Births and Deaths, 2014, discriminate on the basis of gender by failing to afford male spouses the right to assume the surname of their female spouse upon marriage. This statutory and regulatory framework entrenches patriarchal norms and violates the constitutional right to equality and dignity. The limitation imposed does not meet the rational connection and proportionality tests and is not justifiable under the limitation clause. Th…
Source excerpt
Nesengani Royal Family and Others v Douglass and Others (148/2020) [2022] ZALMPTHC 9 (14 November 2022)
The court found that the exclusion of females from succession to traditional leadership in the Nesengani Royal Family was based solely on gender and constituted unfair discrimination, violating Section 9(3) of the Constitution. The administrative actions taken by the Respondents in identifying and recognizing the 1st Respondent as Senior Traditional Leader failed to consider constitutional imperatives of equality and gender non-discrimination. The process was procedurally unfair, as the Applicants' submissions were disregarded and undue weight was given to the 11th Respondent's version. Custo…
Source excerpt
King N.O. and Others v De Jager and Others (CCT 315/18) [2021] ZACC 4; 2021 (5) BCLR 449 (CC); 2021 (4) SA 1 (CC) (19 February 2021)
The Constitutional Court held that clause 7 of the will, which excluded female descendants from inheriting fideicommissary property, constitutes unfair discrimination on the basis of gender and is contrary to public policy as infused by constitutional values. The Court found that freedom of testation, while protected, is not absolute and must yield to the foundational constitutional values of equality and non-sexism. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act specifically prohibits practices that prevent women from inheriting family property. The Court rejected the…
Source excerpt
Holomisa v Holomisa and Another (CCT146/17) [2018] ZACC 40; 2019 (2) BCLR 247 (CC) (23 October 2018)
The Constitutional Court held that section 7(3) of the Divorce Act unfairly excluded certain Transkei marriages from redistribution relief on divorce.
Head of Department Western Cape Education Department and Others v S (1209/2016) [2017] ZASCA 187; [2018] 1 All SA 640 (SCA); 2018 (2) SA 418 (SCA) (13 December 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 40(1) of the South African Schools Act imposes joint and several liability on biological parents for the payment of school fees at public fee-paying schools. However, the Act and Regulations must be interpreted and applied to ensure that single, separated, or divorced parents are able to apply for fee exemptions based on their own financial circumstances when the other parent refuses or fails to provide income information. The Regulations provide for conditional exemptions in such cases, and schools and governing bodies must process applications a…
Source excerpt
Rahube v Rahube and Others (101250/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 651; 2018 (1) SA 638 (GP) (26 September 2017)
Section 2(1) of the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act 112 of 1991 is unconstitutional to the extent that it provides for the automatic conversion of tenure rights into ownership without notice or an opportunity for affected parties to be heard. The legislative scheme perpetuated gender discrimination by excluding women from ownership, as the underlying Proclamation was racist and sexist. The absence of procedural safeguards violated the rights to equality and access to courts under sections 9 and 34 of the Constitution. The declaration of invalidity is made retrospective to 27 April 1994, b…
Source excerpt
Wentzel v Harding Trend Sales (Pty) Ltd (C73/2015) [2017] ZALCCT 41 (5 September 2017)
The court found that the applicant failed to discharge the onus of proving, on a balance of probabilities, that the alleged discriminatory remark was made. The evidence presented by the respondent was consistent and supported by the conduct of the parties before and after the meetings. The applicant's version was undermined by inconsistencies and the absence of corroboration, particularly regarding her interaction with her manager after the meeting. The court concluded that there was no factual basis for a claim of unfair discrimination, as the respondent's approach was consultative and there…
Source excerpt
Ramuhovhi and Another v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (412/2015) [2016] ZALMPTHC 18; 2016 (6) SA 210 (LT) (1 August 2016)
Section 7(1) of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998 is inconsistent with the Constitution as it unjustifiably discriminates against women in polygamous customary marriages entered into before 15 November 2000, on the grounds of gender, race, and ethnic or social origin. The discriminatory effect is compounded by the exclusion of these women from proprietary rights and control over marital property, perpetuating vulnerability and inequality. The court found no justification for this discrimination and held that a direct remedy is required to protect affected women and childr…
Source excerpt
Ndamase v Ndamase and Others (1961/2010) [2015] ZAECMHC 54 (23 April 2015)
High Court dismissed an application challenging the nomination of a headman in Zinkumbini, finding the king’s customary prerogative and residency requirements were not met.
Explore more
