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
3 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative Law [2021] ZAECGHC 33

Eastern Cape NGO Coalition v MEC for Social Development EC

Eastern Cape NGO Coalition v MEC for Social Development EC [2021] ZAECGHC 33 (16 March 2021)

The High Court held that subsidy reductions for NGOs were irrational and unlawful because the Department failed to consult meaningfully, but refused compensation or setting aside.

  • Consultation Requirements
  • Rationality Review
  • Bill Of Rights Limitation
  • Social Security Rights
  • Public Administration Principles
  • Consultation-requirements
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2021] ZAECGHC 36

Eastern Cape NGO Coalition v MEC for the Department of Social Development, Eastern Cape Province (2460/2018)

Eastern Cape NGO Coalition v MEC for the Department of Social Development, Eastern Cape Province (2460/2018) [2021] ZAECGHC 36 (16 March 2021)

The court held that NGO subsidy reductions were unlawful because the Department failed to conduct genuine consultation, but it declined to set aside the allocations or award compensation.

  • Consultation Requirements
  • Irrationality Review
  • Social Security Rights
  • Public Administration Principles
  • Legitimate Expectation
  • Administrative-law
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2020] ZAECGHC 42

Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality and Another v Dingani and Another; In re: Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality and Another v Dayi; In re: Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality and Another v Siqhaza (583/2019; 686/2019; 634/2019)

Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality and Another v Dingani and Another; In re: Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality and Another v Dayi; In re: Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality and Another v Siqhaza (583/2019; 686/2019; 634/2019) [2020] ZAECGHC 42; [2020] 3 All SA 135 (ECG) (12 May 2020)

The court found that the appointments of the respondents as general managers were made in contravention of sections 56 and 66 of the Municipal Systems Act and the applicable regulations. The organogram creating the posts was unlawfully adopted, lacking compliance with regulation 4(7), proper job descriptions, and disclosure of financial implications. The recruitment process failed to require or assess prescribed minimum qualifications and competencies, and the appointments were made without council approval, in breach of statutory and constitutional requirements. The respondents did not demon…

  • Municipal Systems Act
  • Appointment Of Senior Managers
  • Principle Of Legality
  • Staff Establishment
  • Condonation For Delay
  • Public Administration Principles
Read case analysis
Administrative Law [2017] ZAECMHC 35

Xuma v Engcobo Local Municipality and Others (383/2017)

Xuma v Engcobo Local Municipality and Others (383/2017) [2017] ZAECMHC 35 (8 August 2017)

The court found that the renewal of the contracts for the municipal manager, chief financial officer, and corporate services manager did not comply with the mandatory requirements of section 54A and section 56 of the Municipal Systems Act, as well as regulations 9 and 10. The council failed to advertise the posts, ensure prescribed qualifications, and report the process and outcome to the MEC and Minister. The reliance on section 57(6)(c) was misplaced, as it does not override the compliance obligations of section 54A. The council also failed to obtain a report and recommendation from the exe…

  • Municipal Manager Appointment
  • Contract Renewal
  • Local Government Compliance
  • Interdict
  • Public Administration Principles
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2014] ZAGPPHC 251

Basic Education For All and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others (23949/14)

Basic Education For All and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others (23949/14) [2014] ZAGPPHC 251; 2014 (4) SA 274 (GP); [2014] 3 All SA 56 (GP); 2014 (9) BCLR 1039 (GP) (5 May 2014)

The court held that the Department of Basic Education's failure to deliver all prescribed textbooks to every learner in Limpopo before the commencement of the academic year constituted a violation of the right to basic education under section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution, as well as the rights to equality and dignity. The right to basic education is immediately realisable and not subject to progressive realisation or budgetary constraints. The court found that the provision of textbooks is an essential component of basic education and that delivery to some learners but not others is insuffici…

  • Right To Basic Education
  • Supervisory Relief
  • Budgetary Constraints
  • Separation Of Powers
  • Declaratory Order
  • Public Administration Principles
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.