South Africa Case Law

BBKS High School v Department of Education - Limpopo and Others (1471/2025)

BBKS High School v Department of Education - Limpopo and Others (1471/2025) [2025] ZALMPPHC 139 (14 July 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

1471/2025

Judge

M Z Makoti

The court found that the Department of Education's refusal to register BBKS High School as an examination centre was irrational and unlawful. The Department relied on a procedure requiring prior Umalusi accreditation, which is not mandated by any statute, regulation, or official policy. The evidence showed that the school met all minimum requirements for registration, as confirmed by the Department's own feasibility study. Umalusi itself required the examination centre number to finalise accreditation, creating a procedural deadlock that was not supported by law. The Department's conduct unju…

Source excerpt

• Irrationality Of Administrative Action
• Right To Basic Education
• Examination Centre Registration
• Umaluisi Accreditation
• Legality Principle

Concerned Parents of Learners at Atwell Madala Senior Secondary School and Others v Government of the Eastern Cape and Others (3969/2018)

Concerned Parents of Learners at Atwell Madala Senior Secondary School and Others v Government of the Eastern Cape and Others (3969/2018) [2024] ZAECMHC 62 (13 August 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

3969/2018

Judge

Rusi

The court found that while the Department of Education had previously failed to provide adequate infrastructure and address overcrowding, it had since taken concrete steps to remedy these breaches, including the provision of temporary classrooms and the submission of a comprehensive list of affected schools. The applicants did not establish a factual basis for ongoing constitutional breaches in respect of schools beyond those directly involved in the application. The court held that it was not institutionally equipped to supervise the Department's implementation of its Infrastructure Delivery…

Source excerpt

• Right To Basic Education
• School Infrastructure
• Structural Interdict
• Supervisory Jurisdiction
• Separation Of Powers
• Norms And Standards For Public School Infrastructure

Equal Education and Others v Head of Department Western Cape Education Department and Others (7271/2024)

Equal Education and Others v Head of Department Western Cape Education Department and Others (7271/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 189 (24 July 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7271/2024

Judge

Nuku

The court found that the continued delay in placing learners in public schools constituted an ongoing violation of their constitutional right to basic education. The matter was urgent, as learners remained unplaced for months after submitting applications, and only judicial intervention could vindicate their rights. The respondents' undertakings were insufficient, given past failures to communicate placements and enable attendance. The requirements for a final interdict were met: a clear right, ongoing injury, and no alternative remedy. The court ordered the first to third respondents to plac…

Source excerpt

• Right To Basic Education
• School Placement
• Urgent Interdict
• Remedial Relief
• Administrative Action
• Constitutional Mootness

School Governing Body of Pula-Madibogo Primary School and Another v Head of Department of Education, Limpopo and Others (8941/2023)

School Governing Body of Pula-Madibogo Primary School and Another v Head of Department of Education, Limpopo and Others (8941/2023) [2023] ZALMPPHC 98 (19 October 2023)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

8941/2023

Judge

Bresler

The High Court reviewed and set aside decisions blocking a school’s recommended appointment to a vacant post, finding the refusal unlawful and urgent.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Review Of Administrative Action
• School Governance
• Right To Basic Education
• Staff Establishment
• Urgent Interdict

M and Another v College of Modern Montessori Linbro Park and Others (43856/2021)

M and Another v College of Modern Montessori Linbro Park and Others (43856/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 35 (13 January 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

43856/2021

Judge

S Weiner

High Court costs judgment over the urgent expulsion of a Grade 2 child from an independent school. Ordinary party-and-party costs were awarded; punitive costs refused.

• Best Interests Of Child
• Right To Basic Education
• Urgent Interdict
• Costs Award
• Expulsion From School
• Best-interests-of-child

Equal Education and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others (22588/2020)

Equal Education and Others v Minister of Basic Education and Others (22588/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 306; [2020] 4 All SA 102 (GP); 2021 (1) SA 198 (GP) (17 July 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

22588/2020

Judge

S Potterill

The court found that the Minister and MECs have a constitutional and statutory duty to ensure the NSNP provides a daily meal to all qualifying learners, whether attending school or studying remotely due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The suspension or phased roll-out of the NSNP constituted a breach of learners' rights to basic education and basic nutrition under sections 29(1)(a) and 28(1)(c) of the Constitution. The evidence demonstrated that millions of learners were deprived of essential nutrition, with no adequate substitute provided. The respondents' defence was rejected as contrived and uns…

Source excerpt

• Right To Basic Education
• Right To Basic Nutrition
• Structural Interdict
• Judicial Supervision
• Covid 19 Emergency Measures
• Declaratory Relief

Department of Education: Eastern Cape v Siyaphambili Trading 98 CC and Another (1718/2019)

Department of Education: Eastern Cape v Siyaphambili Trading 98 CC and Another (1718/2019) [2020] ZAECGHC 67 (23 June 2020)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

1718/2019

Judge

NG Beshe

The High Court confirmed a rule nisi after respondents dismantled school ablution facilities in breach of prior orders, harming learners’ access to basic education.

• Contempt Of Court
• Right To Basic Education
• Interdict
• Self Help
• Covid 19 School Reopening
• Costs Order

AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others (CCT294/18)

AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others (CCT294/18) [2020] ZACC 12; 2020 (9) BCLR 1029 (CC); 2020 (5) SA 327 (CC) (17 June 2020)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 294/18

Judges

Mogoeng, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Ledwaba, Madlanga, Mhlantla, Nicholls, Theron

The Constitutional Court held that independent schools providing basic education are subject to constitutional obligations not to diminish a child's right to basic education and must act in the best interests of the child. Clause 9.3 of the Parent Contract, which allowed Pridwin to terminate the contract unilaterally without affording a fair hearing, was declared unconstitutional, contrary to public policy, and unenforceable to the extent that it permits cancellation without fair procedure. The Court found that the best interests of the child and the right to basic education are directly impl…

Source excerpt

• Best Interests Of The Child
• Right To Basic Education
• Horizontal Application Of Bill Of Rights
• Contractual Termination In Education
• Procedural Fairness
• Children's Participation Rights

Moodley v Kenmont School and Others (CCT281/18)

Moodley v Kenmont School and Others (CCT281/18) [2019] ZACC 37; 2020 (1) SA 410 (CC); 2020 (1) BCLR 74 (CC) (9 October 2019)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 281/18

Judges

Mogoeng, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Ledwaba, Madlanga, Mhlantla, Nicholls, Theron

Section 58A(4) of the Schools Act, which prohibits the attachment of public school assets, does limit the rights to equality and dignity. However, this limitation is justified under section 36(1) of the Constitution because it serves the crucial purpose of protecting the right to basic education and the best interests of children. Attachment of school assets would undermine the ability of schools, especially those serving disadvantaged communities, to provide education. The limitation is well-tailored to its purpose and no less restrictive means exist. The costs orders against Kenmont School…

Source excerpt

• Constitutional Invalidity
• Right To Basic Education
• Best Interests Of Child
• Costs Orders
• State Liability
• School Governance

Mpungose Traditional Council and Others v MEC for Education, KZN Province and Others (11279/2017P)

Mpungose Traditional Council and Others v MEC for Education, KZN Province and Others (11279/2017P) [2019] ZAKZPHC 45; [2019] 3 All SA 817 (KZP) (17 July 2019)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

11279/2017P

Judge

Vahed

The court found that the MEC's decision to withdraw the establishment of Khuba Secondary School was unlawful, irrational, and procedurally unfair. The Department made repeated, unequivocal promises to the community, which created a legitimate expectation and reliance. The withdrawal was based on flawed feasibility studies that evaluated the wrong site and lacked proper consultation. The Department failed to act in accordance with the constitutional right to basic education, and its conduct was legally and constitutionally unconscionable. The original decision to establish Khuba was final and…

Source excerpt

• Right To Basic Education
• Legitimate Expectation
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Structural Interdict
• Public Promise Enforcement
• Procedural Fairness