Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Constitutional Law [2017] ZAGPJHC 186

AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others (38670/2016)

AB and Another v Pridwin Preparatory School and Others (38670/2016) [2017] ZAGPJHC 186 (3 July 2017)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
38670/2016
Judge
Clare Hartford

The court held that Pridwin Preparatory School, as a wholly independent and unsubsidised private school, does not bear the constitutional obligation to provide basic education under section 29(1)(a) of the Constitution. The right to basic education is guaranteed by the State, not by private entities. The termination of the parent contracts did not infringe the children’s constitutional rights, as the school secured alternative placement for the children in public schools. Section 28(2) requires the best interests of the child to be considered, but does not override all other interests; Marx c…

Source excerpt

  • Contract Termination
  • Best Interests Of Child
  • Freedom Of Association
  • Public Policy
  • Section 29 Right To Education
  • Natural Justice
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2009] ZACC 32

Head of Department : Mpumalanga Department of Education and Another v Hoërskool Ermelo and Another (CCT40/09)

Head of Department : Mpumalanga Department of Education and Another v Hoërskool Ermelo and Another (CCT40/09) [2009] ZACC 32; 2010 (2) SA 415 (CC) ; 2010 (3) BCLR 177 (CC) (14 October 2009)

Court
Constitutional Court
Case number
CCT40/09
Judges
Moseneke DCJ, Langa CJ, Cameron J, Mokgoro J, Ngcobo J, Nkabinde J, O'Regan J, Sachs J, Skweyiya J, Van der Westhuizen J

The Constitutional Court held that, while the Head of Department has the power under section 22(1) of the Schools Act to withdraw a governing body's function to determine language policy on reasonable grounds, this power is not absolute and must be exercised in accordance with constitutional values and procedural fairness. The Court found that the Head of Department unlawfully conflated the powers under sections 22 and 25 by appointing an interim committee to determine language policy, as section 25 only applies where a governing body has ceased or failed to perform its functions, which was n…

Source excerpt

  • Language Policy In Education
  • Section 29 Right To Education
  • School Governance
  • Administrative Reasonableness
  • Procedural Fairness
  • Constitutional Remedies
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.