South Africa Case Law

Commissioner of the South Africa Revenue Service: In re: Cyril and Another v Additional Magistrate, Magistrates Court for the Region of Alexander and Another (28948/2020)

Commissioner of the South Africa Revenue Service: In re: Cyril and Another v Additional Magistrate, Magistrates Court for the Region of Alexander and Another (28948/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 830 (25 October 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

28948/2020

Judge

Mahalelo

The court held that SARS demonstrated a direct and substantial interest in the review application, as the outcome would affect the ambit of its statutory powers under the Customs and Excise Act and could have broader implications for its operations. The respondents' reliance on a general rule against intervention in criminal matters was misplaced, as the intervention sought was in ancillary proceedings, not the criminal trial itself. The court found no merit in the argument that SARS's application was time-barred, as Rule 12 allows intervention at any stage and courts routinely permit such ap…

Source excerpt

• Intervention Application
• Customs And Excise Act
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Retrospective Effect
• Review Of Magistrate Decision

Ekapa Minerals (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sol Plaatje Local Municipality and Others (680/21)

Ekapa Minerals (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sol Plaatje Local Municipality and Others (680/21) [2022] ZANCHC 47 (2 September 2022)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

680/21

Judges

Mamosebo, Ramaepadi

The court found that the Council of the Sol Plaatje Local Municipality imposed a property rates ratio of 1:22 for mining properties, which was significantly higher than the ratios for other non-residential categories, such as industrial and commercial properties. The municipality failed to provide any rational explanation for this differentiation. In the absence of justification, the differentiation was held to be unreasonable and in breach of section 19(c) of the Rates Act, which prohibits unreasonable discrimination between categories of non-residential properties. The applicants, as proper…

Source excerpt

• Municipal Property Rates Act
• Doctrine Of Legality
• Unreasonable Discrimination
• Local Government Powers
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Retrospective Effect

Pareto Limited v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (39314/2015)

Pareto Limited v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (39314/2015) [2018] ZAGPJHC 523 (13 September 2018)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

39314/2015

Judge

Wepener

The court held that the Supreme Court of Appeal, in the SAPOA matter, deliberately refrained from setting aside the impugned rates decision or declaring it invalid, despite finding non-compliance with statutory requirements. The SCA recognized the practical difficulties and knock-on effects of undoing municipal budgets after the fact and expressly declined to order repayment or invalidation. Applying the Oudekraal principle, the High Court found that the decision remained legally effective and extant, as it was not reviewed or set aside. The plaintiff's reliance on Danster was misplaced, as t…

Source excerpt

• Principle Of Legality
• Declaratory Orders
• Municipal Rates
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Retrospective Effect
• Just And Equitable Relief

Levenstein and Others v Estate of the Late Sidney Lewis Frankel and Others (CCT170/17)

Levenstein and Others v Estate of the Late Sidney Lewis Frankel and Others (CCT170/17) [2018] ZACC 16; 2018 (8) BCLR 921 (CC); 2018 (2) SACR 283 (CC) (14 June 2018)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 170/17

Judges

Zondo ACJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jafta J, Kathree Setiloane AJ, Kollapen AJ, Madlanga J, Mhlantla J, Theron J, Zondi AJ

Section 18 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 is unconstitutional to the extent that it bars, in all circumstances, the right to institute prosecution for sexual offences other than rape or compelled rape after 20 years. The distinction drawn by section 18 is irrational and arbitrary, as all sexual offences can cause similar harm and delayed disclosure is common among survivors due to trauma, fear, and social pressures. The prescription period unjustifiably limits the prosecutorial power and violates constitutional rights to dignity, equality, and protection from abuse. The declaration…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Of Criminal Prosecution
• Sexual Offences
• Irrational Legislative Distinction
• Reading In Remedy
• Retrospective Effect
• Costs In Constitutional Litigation

POPCRU and Another v Department of Correctional Services and Another (D642/15)

POPCRU and Another v Department of Correctional Services and Another (D642/15) [2016] ZALCD 25; (2017) 38 ILJ 964 (LC) (23 November 2016)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D642/15

Judge

Whitcher

The court held that the employer's failure to respond to the application for temporary incapacity leave within the prescribed 30 working days does not entitle the employee to such leave. Payments made during the period pending investigation are conditional and do not harden into an entitlement after the lapse of the investigation period. The applicant assumed the risk that his application might not be granted, as clearly indicated in the PILIR policy and application notes. Section 38 of the Public Service Act applies, as the applicant received remuneration not due to him for periods of unappr…

Source excerpt

• Temporary Incapacity Leave
• Public Service Act
• Ministerial Determination
• Salary Deductions
• Collective Agreement
• Retrospective Effect

Pieterse NO v Lephalale Local Municipality (CCT184/16)

Pieterse NO v Lephalale Local Municipality (CCT184/16) [2016] ZACC 40; 2017 (2) BCLR 233 (CC) (10 November 2016)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT184/16

Judges

Mogoeng, Nkabinde, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Mbha, Mhlantla, Musi, Zondo

The Constitutional Court confirmed that section 139 of the Town-planning and Townships Ordinance is unconstitutional because it lets a province appeal municipal planning decisions.

• Municipal Planning
• Separation Of Powers
• Provincial Interference
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Confirmation Proceedings
• Retrospective Effect

Shelton avd Another v Eastern Cape Development Tribunal and Others (489/2015)

Shelton avd Another v Eastern Cape Development Tribunal and Others (489/2015) [2016] ZASCA 125 (26 September 2016)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

489/2015

Judges

Lewis, Wallis, Willis, Saldulker, Potterill

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that a development tribunal had no jurisdiction to decide a land application after the suspension period for invalidity expired.

• Declaration Of Invalidity
• Jurisdiction Of Tribunals
• Suspension Of Invalidity
• Municipal Planning
• Transitional Provisions
• Retrospective Effect

Kunjana v Minister of Police and Others (9073/2015)

Kunjana v Minister of Police and Others (9073/2015) [2015] ZAWCHC 198 (3 December 2015)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

9073/2015

Judge

Veldhuizen

The court declared sections 11(1)(a) and (g) of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act invalid for permitting warrantless searches and seizures, with no retrospective effect.

• Search And Seizure
• Drugs And Drug Trafficking Act
• Invalidity Of Statute
• Constitutional Rights
• Retrospective Effect
• Costs Order

Newlands Surgical Clinic (Pty) Ltd v Peninsula Eye Clinic (Pty) Ltd (086/2014)

Newlands Surgical Clinic (Pty) Ltd v Peninsula Eye Clinic (Pty) Ltd (086/2014) [2015] ZASCA 25; 2015 (4) SA 34 (SCA); [2015] 2 All SA 322 (SCA) (20 March 2015)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

086/2014

Judges

Brand, Lewis, Pillay, Dambuza, Mayat

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that reinstatement of a deregistered company under s 82(4) of the Companies Act 71 of 2008 operates with complete retrospective effect, validating all corporate activities performed during the period of deregistration, including arbitration proceedings and related court orders. The court rejected the notion of partial retrospectivity, finding no textual basis to distinguish between the restoration of property and validation of corporate acts. The SCA further confirmed that its jurisdiction is strictly confined to the grounds upon which leave to appeal was gran…

Source excerpt

• Companies Act 71 Of 2008
• Deregistration And Reinstatement
• Retrospective Effect
• Arbitration Awards
• Public Policy Illegality

Zondi and Others v Somta Tools (Pty) Ltd (D770/10)

Zondi and Others v Somta Tools (Pty) Ltd (D770/10) [2014] ZALCD 31 (9 July 2014)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D770/10

Judge

Cele

The Labour Court held that the applicants’ dismissals for unprotected strike action were substantively unfair because they complied with the employer’s ultimatum and agreement.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Unprotected Strike
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Disciplinary Procedure
• Reinstatement
• Retrospective Effect