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
Iviyo Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd v Dongastro Emperio (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024-304) [2024] ZAGPPHC 420 (9 May 2024)
The High Court granted amended interdicts to stop ongoing illegal coal mining and related conduct, rejected jurisdiction and authority objections, and ordered each side to bear its own costs.
Minister for Environmental Affairs and Another v Aquarius Platinum (SA) (Pty) Ltd and Others (CCT102/15) [2016] ZACC 4; 2016 (5) BCLR 673 (CC) (23 February 2016)
The Constitutional Court held that section 32 of the National Environmental Management Laws Amendment Act prescribed that the Act would come into effect three months from the date of publication by the President. The President's role was limited to publication, which served as a reference point for commencement. There was no legal requirement for the President to ensure that regulations were in place before publication. Parliament intentionally provided a three-month period to allow the Minister to promulgate necessary regulations. The failure to have regulations in place at commencement was…
Source excerpt
Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development v Chonco and Others (159/08) [2009] ZASCA 31; 2009 (6) SA 1 (SCA) ; [2009] 3 All SA 149 (SCA) (30 March 2009)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development has a constitutional obligation to process applications for presidential pardon and to do what is necessary to enable the President to exercise his powers under section 84(2)(j) of the Constitution in an informed manner. The preparatory steps required for the President to make a decision on pardons are executive functions that fall within the ambit of section 85(2)(e) of the Constitution and are the responsibility of the relevant department. The Minister's failure to perform these functions constitut…
Source excerpt
Treatment Action Campaign and Another v Rath and Others (12156/05) [2008] ZAWCHC 34; [2008] 4 All SA 360 (C) (13 June 2008)
The court found that VitaCell, distributed by the Rath respondents, qualifies as a 'medicine' under the Medicines Act due to the medicinal claims made about its efficacy in treating AIDS. The supply of VitaCell to SANCO constitutes a sale under the Act, even if no consideration is received. However, VitaCell is not subject to mandatory registration as a medicine under the 2002 call-up notice, which only initiates a process for potential registration. The Rath respondents conducted clinical trials without authorisation, which is unlawful under the Medicines Act and its regulations. The adverti…
Source excerpt
Explore more
