South Africa Case Law

Labour Party of South Africa v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (2025/092790)

Labour Party of South Africa v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (2025/092790) [2025] ZAGPPHC 743 (17 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025/092790

Judge

de Vos

The Court found that the President's constitutional duty to promote national unity under section 83(c) inherently includes the power to initiate processes such as the National Dialogue. The Labour Party failed to establish a prima facie right, as the President's actions were rationally linked to the constitutional objective of fostering national unity. There was no evidence of unlawful expenditure or exclusion from the process, and the R700 million figure was not final nor proven to breach public finance laws. The alleged harms were either speculative, not irreparable, or capable of redress t…

Source excerpt

• Presidential Powers
• Interim Interdict
• Public Participation
• Separation Of Powers
• Public Finance Management Act
• Rationality Review

Molefe v National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) and Others (2025/084031)

Molefe v National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) and Others (2025/084031) [2025] ZALCJHB 248 (24 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2025/084031

Judge

Daniels

The Labour Court dismissed an urgent bid to interdict the NYDA from filling a post after an offer of employment was withdrawn, finding no prima facie right or balance of convenience.

• Interim Interdict
• Specific Performance
• Unlawful Dismissal
• Section 158 1 H Lra
• Employment Contract
• Separation Of Powers

Society for the Protection of Our Constitution v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (2025-062902)

Society for the Protection of Our Constitution v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (2025-062902) [2025] ZAGPPHC 588 (6 June 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-062902

Judge

S. Potterill

The application was dismissed on multiple grounds. The withdrawal of claims against the foreign states rendered the orders sought obsolete, as the Court cannot make orders against parties not cited. The relief sought involved matters of foreign policy, diplomacy, and military intervention, which fall exclusively within the executive domain and are not justiciable. The applicant failed to establish standing, as no infringement of its own rights or those of an identifiable group was demonstrated, and the alleged harm was speculative and unsupported by evidence. The urgency of the matter was not…

Source excerpt

• Separation Of Powers
• Foreign State Immunity
• Standing
• Urgent Interdict
• Genocide Convention
• Jurisdiction

Democratic Alliance v Hlophe and Others (16170/24 ; 16463/2024 ; 16771/2024)

Democratic Alliance v Hlophe and Others (16170/24 ; 16463/2024 ; 16771/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 234; [2025] 3 All SA 447 (WCC) (2 March 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16170/24

Judges

Mbhele, Basson, Mudau

The court held that the National Assembly failed to exercise its constitutional discretion when designating Dr Hlophe to the Judicial Service Commission, acting under the mistaken belief that it was compelled to accept party nominations without assessing suitability. The designation of Dr Hlophe, who was recently impeached for gross misconduct and continues to denigrate the judiciary, was found to be irrational, unlawful, and inconsistent with the constitutional obligation to protect the integrity and independence of the courts. The court confirmed that the designation constitutes administrat…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Service Commission
• Fit And Proper Criteria
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Separation Of Powers
• Judicial Independence
• Public Confidence In Judiciary

AB Xuma Local Municipality and Another v Kunogqala Local Residents and Others (Leave to Appeal) (4146/2023)

AB Xuma Local Municipality and Another v Kunogqala Local Residents and Others (Leave to Appeal) (4146/2023) [2025] ZAECMHC 41 (27 May 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

4146/2023

Judge

A.S Zono

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The alleged construction of 500 metres of road was not independently planned or executed by the Municipality, but rather incidental to the bridge project, and no separate appointment was made for the road. The Municipality's Integrated Development Plans did not include the Nogqala road, and there was no evidence of a planning framework for its construction. The argument that the court's order infringed the separation of powers was rejected; the order merely directed the Municipality to take ne…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Structural Interdict
• Separation Of Powers
• Municipal Service Delivery
• Dispute Of Facts

Robertson v National Commissioner of the South African Police Services and Others (Appeal) (A291/2021)

Robertson v National Commissioner of the South African Police Services and Others (Appeal) (A291/2021) [2025] ZAGPPHC 361 (10 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A291/2021

Judges

Myburgh, Kubushi, Mali

The majority held that the administrative authorities erred in refusing the renewal of the appellant's firearm licences solely on the basis that they were issued under section 15, without considering his dedicated hunter status and the possibility of renewal under section 16. The court found that the distinction between section 15 and section 16 licences is not material to the rights conferred by the licence itself, and that the renewal process should be governed by the applicant's status and motivation at the time of application. The counter application to review the 2009 decision was dismis…

Source excerpt

• Firearms Control Act
• Renewal Of Licences
• Administrative Review
• Statutory Interpretation
• Transitional Arrangements
• Separation Of Powers

JVDM and Others (104620/2024), Ex parte

JVDM and Others (104620/2024), Ex parte [2025] ZAGPPHC 187; 2025 (4) SA 616 (GP) (24 February 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

104620/2024

Judge

Neukircher

The court found that the surrogate motherhood agreement complied with all requirements of Chapter 19 of the Children’s Act. Medical evidence from two specialists confirmed that the third applicant, CB, is healthy and capable of safely gestating another pregnancy and undergoing a sixth caesarean section. There is no statutory or regulatory limitation on the number of surrogacies or caesarean sections, and the surrogacy is altruistic, not commercial. The absence of legislative restriction is not for the court to remedy, as to do so would violate the separation of powers. Comparative research co…

Source excerpt

• Surrogacy Agreement
• Children S Act
• Parental Rights
• Altruistic Surrogacy
• Medical Screening
• Separation Of Powers

Furman and Another v City of Johannesburg and Others (2022/026555)

Furman and Another v City of Johannesburg and Others (2022/026555) [2025] ZAGPJHC 127 (3 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/026555

Judge

Smit

The court discharged a rule nisi seeking to set municipal charges to nil and compel a clearance certificate, holding that contempt alone did not justify that relief.

• Municipal Services Disputes
• Section 118 Clearance Certificate
• Contempt Of Court
• Dispute Resolution Procedure
• Separation Of Powers
• Municipal-services-disputes

Cholota v Director of Public Prosecutions Free State and Others (4698/2024)

Cholota v Director of Public Prosecutions Free State and Others (4698/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 21 (23 January 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4698/2024

Judge

Hefer AJ

The court found that the applicant's constitutional rights were not violated during witness interviews, as she was warned of the consequences of non-cooperation, given opportunities to consult legal counsel, and not subjected to unlawful coercion or intimidation. The determination of reasonable and probable cause for prosecution is a matter for the criminal trial court, not for preliminary litigation. The court held that it cannot order the withdrawal of charges, as this would breach the separation of powers and the constitutional mandate of the prosecuting authority. The lawfulness of the ap…

Source excerpt

• Unlawful Extradition
• Abuse Of Process
• Reasonable And Probable Cause
• Constitutional Rights
• Separation Of Powers

Channel Construction (Pty) Ltd v Transnet SOC and Others (2024/111291)

Channel Construction (Pty) Ltd v Transnet SOC and Others (2024/111291) [2025] ZAGPJHC 51 (21 January 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/111291

Judge

Fisher

The High Court dismissed an urgent application to stop a Transnet tender from being implemented pending review, finding no prima facie right and no clear case for interim relief.

• Public Procurement
• Interim Interdict
• Paja 180 Day Limit
• Separation Of Powers
• Bid Disqualification
• Interim-interdict