South Africa Case Law

eThekwini Municipality and Another v Independent Schools Association of Southern Africa and Others (960/2019)

eThekwini Municipality and Another v Independent Schools Association of Southern Africa and Others (960/2019) [2021] ZASCA 155; [2022] 1 All SA 17 (SCA) (3 November 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

960/2019

Judges

Mbha, Dlodlo, Mbatha, Ledwaba, Unterhalter

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 19 of the Municipal Property Rates Act, read with the 2010 amended regulations, imposes a binding cap on the rates that municipalities may levy on public benefit organisation property. Municipalities cannot evade this limitation by declining to recognise such property in their rates policies. The constitutional challenge to section 19(1)(b) fails because the Constitution expressly permits national legislation to regulate municipal taxing powers. The validity challenge based on alleged lack of consultation also fails, as the Minister for Cooperativ…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Property Rates Act
• Ministerial Regulation
• Local Government Autonomy
• Consultation Requirements
• Public Benefit Organisation Property
• Constitutional Limitation Of Municipal Powers

Joubert and Others v Benede Blyderivier Watergebruikersvereniging and Another (189/05)

Joubert and Others v Benede Blyderivier Watergebruikersvereniging and Another (189/05) [2006] ZASCA 53; [2006] 4 All SA 549 (SCA); 2007 (4) SA 80 (SCA) (31 March 2006)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

189/05

Judges

Howie, Streicher, Navsa, Conradie, Heher

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the 1987 water notice fixed the maximum extractable water from the state work, not a right to delivery at each farm sluice.

• National Water Act
• Existing Water Rights
• Statutory Interpretation
• Interim Interdict
• Ministerial Regulation
• National-water-act

Photocircuit SA (Pty) Ltd. v De Klerk NO and Others (296/89)

Photocircuit SA (Pty) Ltd. v De Klerk NO and Others (296/89) [1990] ZASCA 158; 1991 (2) SA 11 (AD); [1991] 4 All SA 119 (AD); (1991) 12 ILJ 289 (A) (30 November 1990)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

296/89

Judges

Van Heerden, Milne, Eksteen, Nienaber, Preiss

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 23(1) of the Labour Relations Act confers jurisdiction on industrial councils over all employers within the registered area and occupation, irrespective of membership. The appellant, though not a member, was subject to the council's jurisdiction. The Minister acted within his powers under section 48(1)(b) in excluding certain provisions of the industrial agreement for non-members, resulting in a prohibition on the appellant making deductions for union dues. Compliance with the employees' request would have constituted an offence. The strike was th…

Source excerpt

• Industrial Council Jurisdiction
• Strike Legality
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Ministerial Regulation
• Deduction Of Union Dues

S v Buys (497/88)

S v Buys (497/88) [1989] ZASCA 118; [1990] 1 All SA 368 (A) (26 September 1989)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

497/88

Judges

Corbett, Kumleben, F H Grosskopf

Regulation 12(1)(a), which prohibits burning veld without written permission, is a control measure as contemplated in section 6 of the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act. The appellant admitted to breaching this regulation. Section 6(5) of the Act makes it a criminal offence to refuse or fail to comply with a binding control measure, and section 23(1)(a) prescribes penalties for such offences. The absence of a penalty provision in the regulations does not negate the criminality of the conduct, as the Act itself provides for punishment. The Minister was not required to prescribe penalt…

Source excerpt

• Statutory Offence
• Failure To Comply With Regulation
• Land Resource Management
• Ministerial Regulation
• Statutory Interpretation