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
2 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
Criminal Law [2024] ZAGPJHC 1062

Odumegwu v Regional Court Magistrate Booysens (2023/075664)

Odumegwu v Regional Court Magistrate Booysens (2023/075664) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1062 (22 October 2024)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2023/075664
Judge
AMM

The court held that the review application was premature as no exceptional circumstances existed to justify intervention before the conclusion of the criminal trial. The applicant was out on bail, and the trial was well advanced. The alleged bias and refusal to recuse could be addressed on appeal if the applicant was convicted. The court emphasized that immediate review of recusal refusals in ongoing criminal proceedings would disrupt the administration of justice and potentially overwhelm the courts. The application was dismissed solely on the ground of prematurity, with no determination on…

Source excerpt

  • Recusal Of Judicial Officer
  • Reasonable Apprehension Of Bias
  • Prematurity Of Review
  • Fair Trial Rights
  • Judicial Temperament
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2017] ZAGPPHC 392

De Vries Ambulance Academy (Pty) Ltd v Professional Board for Emergency Care and Others (70434/16)

De Vries Ambulance Academy (Pty) Ltd v Professional Board for Emergency Care and Others (70434/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 392 (28 April 2017)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
70434/16
Judge
V.V. Tlhapi

The court held that the legislative process had not been completed when the applicant launched the review application and the interlocutory application to compel production of the record and reasons. The applicant was afforded an opportunity to make representations, which it exercised after launching the review. The third respondent was obliged to consider these representations before promulgating the regulations. The final regulations were published, rendering any review of the draft regulations moot. The applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances or irreparable harm justifyin…

Source excerpt

  • Rule 53 Procedure
  • Public Participation
  • Review Of Administrative Action
  • Health Professions Act
  • Prematurity Of Review
  • Costs Award
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.