South Africa Case Law

Rikhotso and Another v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (346/2021)

Rikhotso and Another v Premier of Limpopo Province and Others (346/2021) [2023] ZALMPTHC 19 (7 December 2023)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Thohoyandou

Case number

346/2021

Judge

M S Monene

The court found that the Premier had provided the applicants with the reasons for declining their recognition application through several letters, each stating that the decision was based on the recommendations of the Provincial Committee on Traditional Leadership and Disputes. The applicants had received both the letters and the relevant report, which constituted more than the gist of the reasons required by law. The court held that the applicants were not entitled to compel the provision of reasons already in their possession. The late filing of the respondents' answering affidavit was cond…

Source excerpt

• Compel Reasons
• Traditional Leadership Recognition
• Section 33 Constitution
• Paja Obligations

Anthony v Sol Plaatjie Municipality (1359/2019)

Anthony v Sol Plaatjie Municipality (1359/2019) [2020] ZANCHC 26 (12 June 2020)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1359/2019

Judge

N Mayet

The High Court held that the municipality’s brief reasons for registering municipal housing in the ex-wife’s name were adequate under section 33(2).

• Adequacy Of Reasons
• Just Administrative Action
• Section 33 Constitution
• Housing Allocation
• Motion Proceedings
• Administrative-law

Perumal v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (D550/2000)

Perumal v Minister of Safety and Security and Others (D550/2000) [2001] ZALC 77; [2001] 8 BLLR 953 (LC);(2001) 22 ILJ 1870 (LC) (30 May 2001)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

D550/2000

Judge

D Pillay

The Labour Court found that the transfer of the applicant constituted disciplinary action as contemplated by Item 2(1)(c) of Schedule 7 to the LRA. Accordingly, the dispute should have been referred to arbitration, and section 157(5) of the LRA precluded the Court from adjudicating the matter. Even if the Court had jurisdiction, the applicant was afforded an opportunity to make representations regarding the charges, and the decision-maker was entitled to consider all relevant material, whether or not disclosed to the applicant beforehand. The requirements for a fair hearing prior to transfer…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Disciplinary Transfer
• Fair Administrative Action
• Section 157 Lra
• Section 33 Constitution