South Africa Case Law

Mlambo v Minister of National Department of Home Affairs and Another (94266/2019)

Mlambo v Minister of National Department of Home Affairs and Another (94266/2019) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1111 (20 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

94266/2019

Judge

Leso

The court found that the respondents had finalized the applicant's proof of permanent residence application in 2018 but failed to communicate the outcome and reasons directly to the applicant and her attorneys. This delay and referral to another office for collection constituted unreasonable administrative action, violating the applicant's rights under PAJA and the Constitution. The absence of direct communication deprived the applicant of the opportunity to pursue internal remedies or appeal. The court held that the respondents were obliged to communicate the decision and reasons in a prescr…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Immigration Permits
• Delay In Administrative Action
• Review Of Administrative Decisions
• Internal Remedies
• Fair Administrative Procedure

Tiko v Director General Department of Home Affairs and Another (57494/2021)

Tiko v Director General Department of Home Affairs and Another (57494/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 196 (20 February 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

57494/2021

Judge

K Strydom

The High Court set aside the withdrawal of a permanent residence permit, finding no statutory basis under the Immigration Act and procedural unfairness in the appeal process.

• Immigration Permits
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Withdrawal Of Permanent Residence
• Procedural Fairness
• Administrative-law

Dlamini v DG Department of Home Affairs and Another (2115/2021)

Dlamini v DG Department of Home Affairs and Another (2115/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1946 (28 November 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2115/2021

Judge

Botha

The High Court dismissed an application to validate a spousal permit and challenge an identity document, holding the applicant had obtained and used documents by misrepresentation.

• Immigration Permits
• Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Prohibited Person Status
• Rehabilitation Procedure
• Withdrawal Of Permits
• Immigration-law

Harding v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (14733/2023)

Harding v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (14733/2023) [2023] ZAWCHC 267 (30 October 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14733/2023

Judge

Baartman

The court found that the applicant had met the financial requirements for permanent residence under section 27(e) of the Immigration Act, both at the time of his initial application and subsequently, as evidenced by his property ownership, rental income, and irrevocable pension exceeding the prescribed minimum. The Department of Home Affairs failed to provide adequate reasons for its inability to verify the applicant's pension and assets, did not clarify the verification process, and ignored requests for explanation. The respondents conceded that the decision should be reviewed and set aside…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Immigration Permits
• Substitution Order
• Retirement Residence
• Just Administrative Action

Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Helen Suzman Foundation and Others (32323/2022)

Minister of Home Affairs and Another v Helen Suzman Foundation and Others (32323/2022) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1835 (16 October 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

32323/2022

Judges

C Collis, G Malindi, M Motha

The High Court dismissed leave to appeal against a review judgment on the ZEP decision, holding that no reasonable prospect of success was shown.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Public Participation
• Procedural Fairness
• Legality Review
• Costs In Constitutional Litigation
• Immigration Permits

Helen Suzman Foundation and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Others

Helen Suzman Foundation and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 75; 32323/2022 (10 February 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

32323/2022

Judge

Davis

The court refused Operation Dudula’s intervention and granted All Truck Drivers Forum and Allied South Africa leave to intervene in ZEP review proceedings.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Intervention Application
• Direct And Substantial Interest
• Immigration Permits
• Intervention-application
• Direct-and-substantial-interest

Maier and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (4145/2022)

Maier and Another v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (4145/2022) [2022] ZAWCHC 264 (15 December 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

4145/2022

Judge

V C Saldanha

The court found that the applicants had complied with all statutory and regulatory requirements for permanent residence under section 27(e)(ii) of the Immigration Act, providing adequate proof of their net worth and income. The Director General's rejection of their applications was unlawful and unreasonable, lacking substantive justification. Given the respondents' late concession and the egregious conduct in handling the applications, the court determined that exceptional circumstances warranted substituting its own order for the administrative action. The respondents were directed to issue…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Immigration Permits
• Judicial Review
• Costs De Bonis Propriis

Romashko v Director-General of The Department of Home Affairs and Others (25993/2022)

Romashko v Director-General of The Department of Home Affairs and Others (25993/2022) [2022] ZAGPPHC 761 (9 October 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

25993/2022

Judge

Khwinana

The court found that the respondents failed to apply the law to the facts as required by the Immigration Act and the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. The Minister's decision was based on considerations not supported by the Act, such as the absence of children, and failed to account for the applicant's bona fide conduct, long-term residence, and the impact of administrative delays. The respondents did not oppose the application or provide evidence of incompetence or bias, but their failure to properly consider the application warranted judicial intervention. The court held that the mat…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Immigration Permits
• Judicial Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Written Reasons
• Unopposed Motion

Ling and Another v The Director-General of the Department of Home Affairs and Another (6928/2022)

Ling and Another v The Director-General of the Department of Home Affairs and Another (6928/2022) [2022] ZAWCHC 177 (9 September 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

6928/2022

Judge

J Cloete

The court found that the Director-General's refusal of the applicants' permanent residence applications was based solely on a material mistake of fact regarding the authenticity of a bank statement, which was later confirmed to be legitimate. The Director-General failed to provide adequate reasons, leaving the applicants unable to address the alleged fraud or pursue internal remedies. The respondents conceded that the decision was susceptible to review but opposed a substitution order. The court held that, given the lack of any other grounds for refusal, the absence of relevant expertise requ…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review Under Paja
• Adequacy Of Reasons
• Substitution Order
• Immigration Permits
• Material Mistake Of Fact

Z.H and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (15279/2021)

Z.H and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Another (15279/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 150; [2022] 4 All SA 129 (WCC) (20 July 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15279/2021

Judge

P. S. Van Zyl

The court found that the Minister and Director-General's refusals of the applicants' permanent residence permits were unlawful, irrational, and unreasonable. The reasons advanced—lack of a valid temporary residence visa and alleged possession of a fraudulent visa—were not supported by evidence and constituted errors of law and irrelevant considerations. The applicants' applications were fully compliant with the Immigration Act, and the family’s fate was inextricably linked to the first applicant’s status. The delay in instituting review was reasonable given the ongoing litigation and pandemic…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Immigration Permits
• Condonation Of Delay
• Exhaustion Of Internal Remedies
• Prohibited Person Status
• Substitution Of Administrative Decision