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
S v Mtsholotsholo and Others (CC01/2018) [2023] ZAWCHC 340 (26 May 2023)
High Court acquitted three accused in a kidnapping and murder trial, finding witness and warning statements unreliable because they were recorded in English rather than isiXhosa.
Hestony Transport (Pty) Limited v Venter NO and Others (JR2537/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 175 (12 July 2019)
Labour Court reviewed an arbitration award where the commissioner inadequately resolved a factual dispute about language used in a disciplinary hearing.
Thwala v S (CCT329/17) [2018] ZACC 34; 2019 (1) BCLR 156 (CC) (27 September 2018)
The Constitutional Court held that the doctrine of res judicata applies to the applicant's case, as the matter had previously been finally determined by the Court. While the doctrine may be relaxed in exceptional circumstances, such as in Molaudzi, the present case does not meet that threshold. The applicant's new grounds of unfairness, including the conduct of proceedings in Afrikaans and alleged judicial hostility, do not demonstrate manifest injustice or prospects of success. The Court found that the DNA evidence was not exculpatory and that the trial and sentencing proceedings were not un…
Source excerpt
University of the Free State v Afriforum and Another (1027/2016) [2017] ZASCA 32; [2017] 2 All SA 808 (SCA); 2017 (4) SA 283 (SCA) (28 March 2017)
The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld the University of the Free State’s new language policy, finding it was not administrative action and that the university could depart from the language policy guideline.
Lourens v Speaker of the National Assembly of Parliament and Others (20827/2014) [2016] ZASCA 11; [2016] 2 All SA 340 (SCA) (10 March 2016)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Constitution does not require Parliament or the Minister of Arts and Culture to publish all statutes in all 11 official languages. Section 6 of the Constitution allows the use of a minimum of two official languages for government purposes, and the Use of Official Languages Act requires departments to identify three official languages for government purposes. The practice of publishing legislation only in English may disadvantage non-English speakers but does not amount to unfair discrimination as defined by the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of…
Source excerpt
Bolanga v Refugee Status Determination Officer and Others (5027/2012) [2015] ZAKZDHC 13 (24 February 2015)
The High Court reviewed and set aside asylum refusals, held the Refugee Appeal Board was improperly constituted, and declared the applicant a refugee entitled to asylum.
Lourens v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (EC08/12) [2014] ZAEQC 2; 2015 (1) SA 618 (EqC) (17 September 2014)
The court held that there is no constitutional or statutory duty on Parliament or the respondents to publish all national legislation in all official languages, nor to translate all national legislation into all official languages. The Constitution requires parity of esteem and equitable treatment of official languages, but does not mandate equal use or publication in all languages. The Joint Rules of Parliament, which require bills to be in one official language and translated into at least one other, are consistent with constitutional requirements. To the extent that the practice of publish…
Source excerpt
S v Mbezi (WS04/2004) [2010] ZAWCHC 59 (26 March 2010)
The High Court set aside regional court proceedings after finding the accused could not hear or understand the trial, making it unfair.
Lourens v President van die Republiek van Suid Afrika en Andere (49807/09) [2010] ZAGPPHC 19; 2013 (1) SA 499 (GNP) (16 March 2010)
The court found that the national government has not fulfilled its constitutional obligation under section 6(4) of the Constitution to regulate and monitor its use of official languages through legislative and other measures. The evidence showed that while some steps had been taken, such as drafting policy frameworks and establishing translation services, there was no comprehensive set of legislative and other measures in place to regulate and monitor the use of official languages. The court held that it could not compel the government to enact a national language law, as the Constitution doe…
Source excerpt
Gauteng Provincial Legislature In re: Gauteng School Education Bill of 1995 (CCT39/95) [1996] ZACC 4; 1996 (4) BCLR 537; 1996 (3) SA 165 (4 April 1996)
The Court held that section 32(c) of the Constitution does not create a positive obligation on the state to establish educational institutions based on common culture, language, or religion. Rather, it protects the freedom of individuals to establish such institutions, subject to practicability and the prohibition of racial discrimination. The impugned provisions of the Gauteng School Education Bill do not violate constitutional rights, as they do not prevent the establishment of private schools nor do they unlawfully restrict language or religious rights at public schools. The Bill does not…
Source excerpt
Explore more
