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
3 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
Civil Procedure [2024] ZACC 5

President of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Tembani and Others (CCT 162/22)

President of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Tembani and Others (CCT 162/22) [2024] ZACC 5; 2024 (9) BCLR 1152 (CC); 2025 (2) SA 371 (CC) (6 May 2024)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 162/22
Judges
Zondo CJ, Dodson AJ, Kollapen J, Mathopo J, Mhlantla J, Rogers J, Schippers AJ, Tshiqi J

The Constitutional Court held that prescription for the plaintiffs' delictual claims began to run when they had knowledge of the facts giving rise to the debt, which was by 21 July 2015 at the latest. The subsequent confirmation of constitutional invalidity by the Court did not delay the completion of the cause of action; the President's conduct was unconstitutional at the time it occurred, not only from the date of the Court's order. The Law Society application and the intervention by certain plaintiffs did not interrupt prescription, as those proceedings did not constitute processes whereby…

Source excerpt

  • Prescription Act
  • Constitutional Invalidity
  • Delictual Liability
  • International Treaty Obligations
  • Condonation Application
  • Interruption Of Prescription
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2022] ZASCA 22

Trustees for the time being of the Burmilla Trust and Another v President of the RSA and Another (64/2021)

Trustees for the time being of the Burmilla Trust and Another v President of the RSA and Another (64/2021) [2022] ZASCA 22; [2022] 2 All SA 412 (SCA); 2022 (5) SA 78 (SCA) (1 March 2022)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
64/2021
Judges
Van der Merwe, Mbatha, Gorven, Mabindla-Boqwana, Meyer

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the particulars of claim disclosed a cause of action for constitutional damages under s 172(1)(b) of the Constitution in respect of the value of the Rampai mining lease and the costs of prosecuting that claim before the SADC tribunal, as the SADC tribunal could have found the lease valid and expropriated, awarding compensation. The SADC tribunal was not bound by Lesotho court decisions and could have reached a different conclusion based on admissions or new evidence. Van Zyl SCA did not preclude the present claim, as it did not decide the same issues. How…

Source excerpt

  • Constitutional Damages
  • Access To Court
  • Expropriation Without Compensation
  • International Treaty Obligations
  • Exception Procedure
  • Judicial Expropriation
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2018] ZACC 51

Law Society of South Africa and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT67/18)

Law Society of South Africa and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT67/18) [2018] ZACC 51; 2019 (3) BCLR 329 (CC); 2019 (3) SA 30 (CC) (11 December 2018)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT 67/18
Judges
Mogoeng, Basson, Cameron, Dlodlo, Froneman, Goliath, Khampepe, Mhlantla, Petse, Theron

The Constitutional Court held that the President's participation in the suspension of the SADC Tribunal and his signature of the 2014 Protocol were unconstitutional, unlawful and irrational. The President acted contrary to South Africa's binding obligations under the SADC Treaty, which guarantees access to justice and the protection of human rights. The process followed to amend the Tribunal's jurisdiction was irregular and did not comply with the Treaty’s requirement for a three-quarters majority. The President lacked the authority to sign the Protocol without parliamentary approval, and his…

Source excerpt

  • Presidential Conduct
  • International Treaty Obligations
  • Access To Justice
  • Rule Of Law
  • Separation Of Powers
  • Sadc Tribunal
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2018] ZAGPPHC 4

Law Society of South Africa and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (20382/2015)

Law Society of South Africa and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (20382/2015) [2018] ZAGPPHC 4; [2018] 2 All SA 806 (GP); 2018 (6) BCLR 695 (GP) (1 March 2018)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
20382/2015
Judges
D. Mlambo, N. Mngqibisa-Thusi, H.J Fabricius

The Court found that the President's participation in suspending the SADC Tribunal and signing the 2014 Protocol was unlawful, irrational, and unconstitutional. The SADC Treaty and Protocol, approved by Parliament, guarantee individual access to the Tribunal and impose binding obligations on South Africa. The Executive cannot unilaterally suspend or withdraw from these obligations without parliamentary approval. The President's actions undermined the Rule of Law, democracy, and human rights, and failed the rationality test. The suspension of the Tribunal and the signing of the Protocol interf…

Source excerpt

  • International Treaty Obligations
  • Executive Power
  • Rule Of Law
  • Access To Justice
  • Rationality Review
  • Separation Of Powers
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.