South Africa Case Law

Action SA v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (070799/2023)

Action SA v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Others (070799/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 159 (14 February 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

070799/2023

Judge

N.P. Mali

The High Court set aside Tshwane council decisions made by a conflicted Speaker who failed to recuse himself from no-confidence motions against him.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Municipal Structures Act
• Recusal And Bias
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Local Government Procedure
• Substitution Of Administrative Action

Democratic Alliance and Another v Council of Theewaterskloof Local Municipality and Others (19623/2024)

Democratic Alliance and Another v Council of Theewaterskloof Local Municipality and Others (19623/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 371 (15 November 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

19623/2024

Judge

Lekhuleni

The High Court set aside Theewaterskloof Municipality’s removal of Lincoln De Bruyn as executive mayor and the election of Theunis Zimmerman, citing unlawful procedure and inadequate notice.

• Municipal Structures Act
• Principle Of Legality
• Procedural Fairness
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Waiver Of Rights
• Punitive Costs

African Transformation Movement v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (7186/2022; 21574/2022)

African Transformation Movement v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (7186/2022; 21574/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 101; [2023] 3 All SA 58 (WCC) (26 April 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7186/2022; 21574/2022

Judges

Le Grange, Binns-Ward, Thulare

The court found that both applications were moot, as the votes in question had already taken place and any decision would have no practical effect. The Speaker's discretion was exercised with due regard to constitutional principles of openness and accountability, and her reasons were rational and holistic. The ATM failed to demonstrate any material error, irrationality, or bad faith in the Speaker's decisions. The court held that the validity of parliamentary resolutions does not depend on whether voting is open or secret, but on whether members exercise their votes without undue influence or…

Source excerpt

• Secret Ballot In Parliament
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Impeachment Proceedings
• Rationality Review
• Separation Of Powers
• Parliamentary Procedure

Macingwane v Masekwameng and Others (626/2021)

Macingwane v Masekwameng and Others (626/2021) [2022] ZASCA 174 (7 December 2022)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

626/2021

Judges

Zondi, Van der Merwe, Molemela, Windell, Chetty

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that clause 28.4.4 of the NAFCOC Constitution, as amended in 2011, clearly empowers the President, any Chairperson of a Provincial Executive Committee, or the National Chairperson of Provinces, in consultation with the Executive Committee, to convene Council meetings. The appellant's proposed hierarchical interpretation was unsupported by the text, context, or purpose of the clause. The amendment was specifically intended to prevent a President from obstructing Council meetings. The meeting of 31 July 2019 at NAFCOC Head Office was lawfully convened, and the r…

Source excerpt

• Voluntary Association Constitution
• Interpretation Of Constitution
• Removal Of Office Bearer
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Meeting Convening Authority

Democratic Alliance v Matika and Others (1858/18; 1860/18)

Democratic Alliance v Matika and Others (1858/18; 1860/18) [2018] ZANCHC 55; 2019 (1) SA 214 (NCK) (29 August 2018)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1858/18; 1860/18

Judges

Tlaletsi JP, Olivier ADJP

The court found that the meeting held on 25 July 2018 was not lawfully convened, as only the Speaker or Acting Speaker is empowered to call council meetings, and the Acting Speaker did not do so. No proper notice was given to all councillors, including Mr Matika, in violation of the Municipal Structures Act and the Rules of Order. The absence of notice deprived councillors of their right to participate and debate, frustrating the objects of democratic local government and the audi alteram partem principle. The resolutions adopted at the meeting, including the removal of Mr Matika as Executive…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Structures Act
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Council Meeting Validity
• Notice Requirements
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Local Government Rules

De Lille v Democratic Alliance and Others (2153/18)

De Lille v Democratic Alliance and Others (2153/18) [2018] ZAWCHC 22; [2018] 2 All SA 464 (WCC); 2018 (4) SA 171 (WCC) (14 February 2018)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2153/18

Judge

Henney

The court found that the applicant was justified in seeking interim relief due to the uncertainty and apprehension created by the DA's caucus regulations and party constitution, which appeared to bind councillors to vote according to party instructions. The court held that, in line with constitutional principles and the UDM decision, councillors must be allowed to vote according to their conscience in motions of no-confidence. The Speaker has discretion under the Rules of Order to determine whether voting should be by secret ballot, and this discretion must be exercised rationally and constit…

Source excerpt

• Motion Of No Confidence
• Secret Ballot
• Party Discipline
• Local Government Structures Act
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Interim Interdict

Tlouamma and Others v Mbete, Speaker of the National Assembly of the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa and and Another (3236/2015)

Tlouamma and Others v Mbete, Speaker of the National Assembly of the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa and and Another (3236/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 22 (27 February 2015)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

3236/2015

Judge

Binns-Ward

The Court found that the application for interim relief was properly brought as a matter of urgency, given the imminent parliamentary debate and the refusal of direct access by the Constitutional Court. However, the applicants failed to establish all requirements for an interim interdict. The Court was not persuaded that irreparable harm would result if the interdict was refused, as the applicants could withdraw and re-enlist the motion after the principal relief was determined. The respondent's assurances and the provisions of Rule 102A mitigated the risk of obstruction. Furthermore, the sep…

Source excerpt

• Separation Of Powers
• Interim Interdict
• Urgency In Application
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Parliamentary Procedure

Van Zyl v New National Party and Others (2000/002)

Van Zyl v New National Party and Others (2000/002) [2003] ZAWCHC 17; [2003] 3 All SA 737 (C); 2003 (10) BCLR 1167 (C) (22 May 2003)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2000/002

Judge

D Van Reenen

The court held that the adoption of the vote of no confidence by the Western Cape Provincial Parliament was a political decision of a deliberative legislative body and not susceptible to judicial review as administrative action under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act or the Constitution. However, the recall resolution by the New National Party, Western Cape, constituted the exercise of a public power in terms of section 62(4)(c) of the Constitution and was subject to review under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act. The recall adversely affected the applicant's rights and ha…

Source excerpt

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Procedural Fairness
• Recall Of Public Officials
• Motion Of No Confidence
• Party Political Powers
• Judicial Review