South Africa Case Law

Lang v ABSA Bank and Others (079773/2023)

Lang v ABSA Bank and Others (079773/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 891 (11 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

079773/2023

Judge

N Manoim

The applicant, Brett Lang, failed to establish locus standi on any of the grounds advanced. As an unrehabilitated insolvent, he lacked the legal capacity to litigate without the trustee's consent and was neither a current director nor shareholder of the companies in question. His reliance on public interest standing under section 38 of the Constitution was unsubstantiated, as he did not demonstrate a sufficient connection to the rights asserted beyond his personal grievance. The relief sought was hypothetical, academic, and framed as a moral judgment rather than a legal determination, lacking…

Source excerpt

• Locus Standi
• Declaratory Relief
• Insolvency
• Director Liability
• Public Interest Standing

Surrogacy Advisory Group NPC v Minister of Health (038988/2022)

Surrogacy Advisory Group NPC v Minister of Health (038988/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 431 (7 May 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

038988/2022

Judge

Retief

The High Court dismissed a public-interest constitutional challenge to surrogacy-related fertility regulations for lack of standing and non-joinder.

• Public Interest Standing
• Non Joinder
• Artificial Fertilisation Regulation
• Surrogacy Agreements
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Public-interest-standing

Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Another v Hopeson and Others (2022-045978)

Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Another v Hopeson and Others (2022-045978) [2024] ZAGPJHC 235 (8 March 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/045978

Judge

Manoim

The court held that its previous order amending the particulars of claim was not final, definitive, or dispositive of the parties' rights, and thus not appealable under the Zweni test. The issue of whether the plaintiffs, as creditors, have standing to seek disqualification of directors under section 162 of the Companies Act is a factual enquiry to be determined at trial, not a point of substantive law finally decided at this stage. The court rejected the argument that leave of the court is required before issuing summons under section 157(1)(d), following previous decisions and noting that t…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Standing Of Creditors
• Delinquent Directors
• Companies Act Section 162
• Public Interest Standing

Balwin Properties Ltd v Axton Matrix Construction (Pty) Ltd and Another (21/56565)

Balwin Properties Ltd v Axton Matrix Construction (Pty) Ltd and Another (21/56565) [2024] ZAGPJHC 154 (19 February 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

21/56565

Judge

Salmon AJ

The court held that Balwin Properties Ltd has both own-interest and public-interest standing to intervene in the review application. Its substantial investments, the dependency of its developments on the K60 upgrade, and the broader economic and social impact of delays establish a direct and substantial interest beyond mere financial concerns. The court found that the interests of justice and the public interest in the integrity of state tender processes warrant Balwin's intervention, both to seek mandatory relief and to oppose the relief sought by the Joint Venture parties. The court granted…

Source excerpt

• Intervention Application
• Mandamus
• Review Of Tender Award
• Direct And Substantial Interest
• Public Interest Standing
• Condonation

Helen Suzman Foundation v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (32858/2020)

Helen Suzman Foundation v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (32858/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 574 (5 October 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

32858/2020

Judges

D Mlambo, N Kollapen, S Baqwa

The High Court dismissed Helen Suzman Foundation’s bid to compel Covid-19-specific legislation, holding the Disaster Management Act already provided a lawful response.

• Separation Of Powers
• Parliamentary Duties
• Disaster Management Act
• Bill Of Rights Limitation
• Public Interest Standing
• Separation-of-powers

Claasen and Others v MEC for Transport and Public Works, Western Cape Provincial Department and Another (23595/2015)

Claasen and Others v MEC for Transport and Public Works, Western Cape Provincial Department and Another (23595/2015) [2016] ZAWCHC 167 (11 November 2016)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

23595/2015

Judge

Davis

The Court found that the eviction order granted by Blignault J failed to comply with the constitutional and statutory requirements for eviction, particularly the duty to conduct a comprehensive enquiry into the circumstances of the occupiers and to ensure meaningful engagement and provision of alternative accommodation. The applicants, though procedurally defaulting, were vulnerable, lacked resources and legal knowledge, and were not adequately notified or engaged. The respondents did not provide sufficient information about the identities and circumstances of the occupiers, nor did they ensu…

Source excerpt

• Eviction
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Right To Adequate Housing
• Meaningful Engagement
• Public Interest Standing
• Emergency Housing

Genesis Medical Scheme v Minister of Health; In re: Medi-Clinic Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others v Treatment Action Campaign NPC and Others (15268/14)

Genesis Medical Scheme v Minister of Health; In re: Medi-Clinic Southern Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others v Treatment Action Campaign NPC and Others (15268/14) [2015] ZAWCHC 124; [2015] 4 All SA 302 (WCC) (29 July 2015)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

15268/14

Judge

Blignault

High Court decision granting leave to intervene and admit amici in a review of Medical Schemes Regulation 8.

• Medical Schemes Act
• Regulation Ultra Vires
• Prescribed Minimum Benefits
• Public Interest Standing
• Joinder Of Parties
• Bill Of Rights Access To Healthcare

Zuma v Democratic Alliance and Others (836/2013)

Zuma v Democratic Alliance and Others (836/2013) [2014] ZASCA 101; [2014] 4 All SA 35 (SCA) (28 August 2014)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

836/2013

Judges

Mpati, Navsa, Brand, Ponnan, Tshiqi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court correctly interpreted and enforced its previous order regarding the production of the record of decision to discontinue prosecution against Mr Zuma. The audio recordings and transcripts referenced in the NDPP's announcement were not confidential, as they had been publicly quoted and verified by the National Intelligence Agency, and their existence predated Mr Zuma's representations. No specific claim of confidentiality was made by Mr Zuma regarding any particular document, and the NDPP's office failed to assert or justify any such claim. Th…

Source excerpt

• Review Of Prosecutorial Decision
• Confidentiality Of Representations
• Rule 53 Record Production
• Public Interest Standing
• Rationality Review
• Costs Orders

Freedom Under Law v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (26912/12)

Freedom Under Law v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (26912/12) [2013] ZAGPPHC 271; [2013] 4 All SA 657 (GNP); 2014 (1) SA 254 (GNP); 2014 (1) SACR 111 (GNP) (23 September 2013)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

26912/12

Judge

Murphy

The court found that the decisions to withdraw criminal and disciplinary charges against Lieutenant-General Richard Mdluli were unlawful, irrational, and invalid. The Special Director of Public Prosecutions withdrew charges without the required concurrence of the relevant DPP, violating section 24(3) of the NPA Act. The process was arbitrary, ignored compelling evidence, and failed to consult relevant stakeholders, breaching the requirements of legality and rationality. The withdrawal of disciplinary charges and reinstatement of Mdluli were made under dictation from unauthorised persons, amou…

Source excerpt

• Prosecutorial Discretion
• Withdrawal Of Charges
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• Rule Of Law Review
• Public Interest Standing
• Consultation Requirement

La Lucia Sands Share Block Ltd v Flexi Holiday Club and Others (NCT/5486/2012/R4)

La Lucia Sands Share Block Ltd v Flexi Holiday Club and Others (NCT/5486/2012/R4) [2013] ZANCT 18 (10 June 2013)

Court

National Consumer Tribunal

Case number

NCT/5486/2012/R4

Judges

Y Carrim, D Terblanche, B Dumisa

The Tribunal held that a share block company could seek leave to act in the public interest under the CPA, but the complaint had first to be investigated by the Commission.

• Consumer Protection Act
• Public Interest Standing
• Share Block Control Act
• Juristic Person Locus Standi
• Consumer-protection
• Public-interest-standing