Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Marite v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (21369/2023; B1092/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 130 (13 February 2024)
The High Court dismissed Dr Marite’s application for leave to appeal, holding there were no reasonable prospects of success and no compelling reason to hear it.
Marite v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (21369/2023; B1092/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1119 (5 September 2023)
The applicant failed to establish the requirements for a final interdict. The court found no evidence of harassment, intimidation, or unlawful conduct by the SIU or Mr Siweya. The SIU acted within its statutory mandate, and the applicant voluntarily participated in the interview. Disputes of fact raised by the respondents were genuine and bona fide, and the applicant's case was based on conjecture and unsubstantiated inferences. The applicant did not demonstrate a clear right, injury actually committed or reasonably apprehended, or lack of adequate alternative remedy. Relief sought against th…
Source excerpt
Telkom SA (SOC) Ltd v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 559; 007566/2022 (19 July 2023)
The High Court set aside a presidential proclamation authorising an SIU investigation into Telkom, finding Telkom was not a state institution and the decision was irrational.
Ledla Structural Development (Pty) Ltd and Others v Special Investigating Unit (CCT 319/21) [2023] ZACC 8; 2023 (6) BCLR 709 (CC); 2023 (2) SACR 1 (CC) (10 March 2023)
The Constitutional Court held that the Special Tribunal is not a court as contemplated by section 166 of the Constitution, given its ad hoc establishment, lack of security of tenure for members, and limited jurisdiction to civil proceedings arising from SIU investigations. However, the Tribunal is empowered by section 8(2) of the SIU Act to adjudicate any civil proceedings brought by the SIU, which includes legality reviews of unlawful contracts. The Tribunal's powers are broader than those of the Competition Tribunal, as there is no statutory carve-out limiting its jurisdiction over legality…
Source excerpt
Special Investigating Unit and Another v Ndlovu and Others (GP 19/2021) [2023] ZAST 2 (31 January 2023)
The Tribunal found that the applicants were entitled to relief under section 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act. The preservation orders remained operative and were not disturbed by the application for leave to appeal. The s18(3) order sought to entrench the status quo that prevailed prior to the 7 June 2022 order, ensuring the preserved assets remained under control and preventing their dissipation. The respondents failed to comply with preservation orders and did not dispute the applicants' version that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities. The Tribunal held that the Superior Court…
Source excerpt
Special Investigating Unit and Another v Lebelo and Others (GP06 /2022) [2022] ZAST 18 (8 August 2022)
The Tribunal found that the appointment of a curator bonis is necessary to preserve the value of immovable properties acquired through unlawful activities, given the risk that the respondents may lose incentive to maintain them pending civil proceedings. The Tribunal held that there is no rigid rule for appointing a curator bonis; rather, the circumstances and the purpose of the preservation order are decisive. The suitability of the proposed curator bonis was established through supplementary evidence, and the respondents did not oppose this further information. The Tribunal also held that t…
Source excerpt
Mphaphuli Consulting (PTY) Limited v Special Investigating Unit and Others (5232/2021) [2022] ZALMPPHC 16 (3 March 2022)
The High Court held that the SIU’s investigation into Mphaphuli Consulting fell within Proclamation R52 of 2014 and that the SIU report was not PAJA administrative action.
Special Investigating Unit v MEC for Health for the Province of the Eastern Cape and Others (3658/2016) [2021] ZAECMHC 32 (30 August 2021)
The court held that the SIU failed to establish locus standi to intervene in the finalized action. The alleged omission by the State Attorney to raise the public healthcare defence did not amount to serious maladministration within the meaning of the SIU's enabling Act or the relevant Proclamation. The SIU's mandate does not extend to reopening settled litigation or rescinding final court orders where no impropriety or unlawful conduct is established. The court emphasized that the right to relief must exist for the State institution itself, and the SIU cannot create such a right by mere inves…
Source excerpt
Special Investigating Unit and Another v Caledon River Properties (Pty) Ltd t/a Magwa Construction and Another (GP/17/2020) [2021] ZAST 4 (26 February 2021)
The Special Tribunal is a court of similar status to the High Court as defined in section 166(e) of the Constitution. Its establishment by presidential proclamation under the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act does not detract from its status as a court recognized by national legislation. The Tribunal possesses judicial authority, independence, and procedural features akin to the High Court, including the power to adjudicate civil matters arising from SIU investigations and to make any order necessary to give effect to its decisions. Section 170 of the Constitution confers…
Source excerpt
Chagi and Others v Special Investigating Unit (CCT 101/07) [2008] ZACC 22; 2009 (2) SA 1 (CC); 2009 (3) BCLR 227 (CC) ; 2009 (1) SACR 339 (CC) (3 December 2008)
The Constitutional Court held that liabilities of the first Special Investigating Unit were not extinguished by repeal of the 1997 proclamation.
Explore more
