South Africa Case Law

Setman v Minister of Police (Appeal) (2929/2021)

Setman v Minister of Police (Appeal) (2929/2021) [2025] ZAECMKHC 11 (11 February 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

2929/2021

Judges

Dawood, Collett

The court held that service of summons on the State Attorney within the three-year prescription period was sufficient to interrupt prescription, as the respondent became aware of the proceedings and actively participated by filing an appearance to defend and a plea. The purpose of the Institution of Legal Proceedings Act was achieved, and strict compliance with service on both the National and Provincial Commissioner was not required. The court adopted a purposive constitutional approach, emphasizing access to courts and the absence of prejudice to the respondent. The special pleas of prescri…

Source excerpt

• Prescription
• Service Of Process
• Purposive Interpretation
• Access To Courts

Ratlou v Man Financial Services SA (Pty) Ltd (1309/17)

Ratlou v Man Financial Services SA (Pty) Ltd (1309/17) [2019] ZASCA 49; 2019 (5) SA 117 (SCA) (1 April 2019)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1309/17

Judges

Lewis, Swain, Dambuza, Carelse, Matojane

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the settlement agreement, although meeting the literal definition of a credit transaction under s 8(4)(f) of the National Credit Act, should not be governed by the Act because the underlying rental agreements and suretyship were excluded from its ambit. The court found that a purposive interpretation of the NCA was necessary to avoid absurd results and to give effect to the Act's objectives, which focus on protecting consumers in genuine credit transactions. Applying the NCA to settlement agreements arising from non-credit transactions would undermine the…

Source excerpt

• National Credit Act
• Settlement Agreement
• Acknowledgment Of Debt
• Suretyship
• Purposive Interpretation
• Credit Transaction

Orica Mining Services SA (Pty) Ltd v Elbroc Mining Products (Pty) Ltd (233/2016)

Orica Mining Services SA (Pty) Ltd v Elbroc Mining Products (Pty) Ltd (233/2016) [2017] ZASCA 48; [2017] 2 All SA 796 (SCA); 2017 BIP 1 (SCA) (31 March 2017)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

233/2016

Judges

Maya, Swain, Dambuza, Nicholls, Mbatha

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that ‘between’ in the patent claims was not limited to a linearly positioned carriage and found Elbroc’s rig infringed.

• Patent Infringement
• Claim Construction
• Purposive Interpretation
• Patents Act 1978
• Scope Of Monopoly
• Patent-infringement

Democratic Alliance and Another v African National Congress and Another (001/15 EC)

Democratic Alliance and Another v African National Congress and Another (001/15 EC) [2015] ZAEC 1 (5 March 2015)

Court

Electoral Court

Case number

001/15 EC

Judges

S Pather, Shongwe, Wepener

The court held that the ANC's late submission of the deposit cheque, by a matter of minutes, did not constitute a fatal flaw justifying exclusion of its candidate from the by-election. The court found that there was substantial compliance with the requirements of the Local Government: Municipal Electoral Act, and that the ANC's conduct demonstrated a serious intention to participate. The court adopted a purposive and flexible approach to the interpretation of electoral time-tables, guided by constitutional values that encourage participation in democratic elections. The court rejected the DA'…

Source excerpt

• Substantial Compliance
• Electoral Procedure
• Purposive Interpretation
• Participation In Elections
• Cut Off Time
• Judicial Review

Kalahari Country Club v National Union of Mineworkers and Another (CA16/2013)

Kalahari Country Club v National Union of Mineworkers and Another (CA16/2013) [2014] ZALCCT 67 (3 December 2014)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

CA16/2013

Judges

Tlaletsi, Hlophe, Dlodlo

The court held that Mr Mabote was a member of NUM, as evidenced by the club's extension of organisational rights and deduction of union subscriptions. The club's business was sufficiently allied to mining to fall within NUM's constitution. The referral and conciliation forms confirmed NUM's representation of Mr Mabote, and the club did not object during conciliation. The court found that a purposive interpretation of the CCMA Rules and the LRA is required, prioritising fairness and the constitutional right to representation. The arbitrator's restrictive interpretation was incorrect, and the L…

Source excerpt

• Trade Union Representation
• Ccma Rules Interpretation
• Purposive Interpretation
• Employee Rights

Aviation Union of South Africa obo Barnes and Others v South African Airways (Pty) Ltd and Others (JA 51/07)

Aviation Union of South Africa obo Barnes and Others v South African Airways (Pty) Ltd and Others (JA 51/07) [2009] ZALAC 12; 2010 (4) SA 604 (LAC) ; [2010] 1 BLLR 14 (LAC); (2009) 30 ILJ 2849 (LAC) (9 October 2009)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA 51/07

Judges

Zondo JP, Davis JA, Leeuw JA

The Labour Appeal Court held that section 197 of the Labour Relations Act is capable of applying to second generation transfers, including situations where, upon termination of an outsourcing agreement, services are transferred back to the original employer or contracted out to another party. The Court rejected a narrow, literal interpretation of section 197(1)(b) that would limit its application only to transfers actively effected by the old employer. Instead, the Court adopted a purposive approach, emphasizing the statutory objectives of protecting employees against job losses and facilitat…

Source excerpt

• Section 197 Transfer
• Outsourcing
• Second Generation Transfer
• Automatic Substitution
• Purposive Interpretation
• Unfair Dismissal

Minister of Land Affairs of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Slamdien and Others (LCC107/98)

Minister of Land Affairs of the Republic of South Africa and Another v Slamdien and Others (LCC107/98) [1999] ZALCC 6 (10 February 1999)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC107/98

Judges

Dodson, Meer

The court held that the sale of the property was not a dispossession caused by a racially discriminatory law or practice, so restitution was barred.

• Restitution Of Land Rights Act
• Group Areas Act
• Causation In Statutory Interpretation
• Racially Discriminatory Laws
• Purposive Interpretation
• Constitutional Property Rights