Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Noko v Pharmacare Ltd (PS 44/2013) [2015] ZALCPE 30 (24 April 2015)
The Labour Court condoned a late referral of an unfair dismissal claim, finding a reasonable explanation for delay and no undue prejudice to the respondent.
Mahlangu v Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform and Another (LCC 48/2011) [2014] ZALCC 7 (21 May 2014)
The Land Claims Court dismissed a late postponement request and held that the Mahlangu Family lacked locus standi because the lodged claim was Ms Sikhosana’s individual claim.
Amalgamated Real Estate Principals Group CC t/a Charter Property Sales v The Home Trader (Eastern Cape) (Pty) Ltd t/a East Cape Property Guide (16/CR/Feb07) [2013] ZACT 14; [2013] 1 CPLR 282 (CT) (8 March 2013)
The Tribunal dismissed a late amendment condonation application and the underlying complaint referral, finding the dispute was already resolved and lacked a proper competition-law basis.
Marthienus van Biljon v Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform and Others (LCC 173/2008) [2013] ZALCC 3 (29 January 2013)
The Land Claims Court issued a rule nisi on whether the applicant’s land claim had been referred, or alternatively whether trials should be separated.
Woodlands Dairy (Pty) Ltd and Another v Competition Commission (2010 (6) SA 108 (SCA); [2011] 3 All SA 192 (SCA)) [2010] ZASCA 104; 105/2010 (13 September 2010)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Competition Commission's initiation of a broad investigation into the milk industry in 2005 was invalid, as it was not based on reasonable suspicion of specific prohibited practices and failed to identify particular parties or conduct. The subsequent summonses issued under section 49A were void for vagueness and overbreadth, and the evidence obtained through these summonses was tainted. The 2006 complaint initiations and referrals to the Competition Tribunal were directly derived from the invalid 2005 investigation and thus had to be set aside. The Co…
Source excerpt
JT Publishing (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (CCT49/95) [1996] ZACC 23; 1996 (12) BCLR 1599; 1997 (3) SA 514 (21 November 1996)
The Constitutional Court held that section 102(1) of the interim Constitution permits referral to the Constitutional Court even when the only issue raised is a constitutional one. The refusal by the lower court to refer the matter was incorrect, as the issues were decisive for the case and fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. However, the court declined to grant a declaratory order on the constitutional validity of the Publications Act and the Indecent or Obscene Photographic Matter Act because both statutes had been repealed and replaced by new legislation, ren…
Source excerpt
S v Bequinot (CCT24/95) [1996] ZACC 21; 1996 (12) BCLR 1588; 1997 (2) SA 887 (18 November 1996)
The Constitutional Court held that the referral of the constitutional validity of section 37 of the General Law Amendment Act 62 of 1955 was procedurally and substantively defective. The lower court failed to provide adequate reasons for the referral, did not establish that the constitutional issue was decisive for the outcome, and did not consider whether the interests of justice warranted interruption of the criminal appeal. The parties had not raised the constitutional issue themselves, and the factual and legal matters underpinning the conviction had not been properly canvassed or resolve…
Source excerpt
Luitingh v Minister of Defence (CCT29/95) [1996] ZACC 5; 1996 (4) BCLR 581; 1996 (2) SA 909 (4 April 1996)
The Constitutional Court struck a premature referral off the roll, refused direct access, and sent the case back to the Transvaal Provincial Division.
Ferreira v Levin NO and Others; Vryenhoek and Others v Powell NO and Others (CT5/95) [1996] ZACC 27; 1996 (2) SA 621 (CC); 1996 (4) BCLR 441 (CC) (19 March 1996)
The Constitutional Court held that all parties should bear their own costs after the applicants achieved only limited constitutional success.
Explore more
