South Africa Case Law

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa and Others v Open Heaven Community Radio and Others (1133/2023)

Independent Communications Authority of South Africa and Others v Open Heaven Community Radio and Others (1133/2023) [2025] ZASCA 117 (12 August 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1133/2023

Judges

Dambuza, Mbatha, Dolamo

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that ICASA has the discretion to condone late submissions of renewal notices for class broadcasting licences under s 19(2) of the Electronic Communications Act, as the six-month period is intended for ICASA’s administrative benefit. The court found that substantial compliance with the statutory purpose suffices and that ICASA should have considered Open Heaven’s late renewal notice, which was only 14 days out of time. Regarding the 2021 regulations, the court determined that the extension of licence validity from five to seven years applies to all class licenc…

Source excerpt

• Broadcasting Licence Renewal
• Retrospective Application Of Regulations
• Condonation Of Late Filing
• Statutory Interpretation
• Regulatory Discretion

Tridevco (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (62/2024)

Tridevco (Pty) Ltd and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform & Rural Development and Others (62/2024) [2025] ZASCA 110 (23 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

62/2024

Judges

Nicholls, Unterhalter, Dawood, Vally, Norman

The majority held that the property does not meet the exclusion criteria under section 1(a) of SALA, as it is not situated in an area where a local area committee was established, despite its inclusion in the Peri-Urban Town Planning Scheme. The Minister's refusal to consent to subdivision was based on the property's high agricultural potential and the need to preserve land for food security, which aligns with the purpose of SALA. However, the Minister failed to consult with the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, whose development plans and constitutional obligations could be thwarted by t…

Source excerpt

• Subdivision Of Agricultural Land Act
• Statutory Interpretation
• Municipal Consultation
• Constitutional Duties Of Minister
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Local Government Planning

Hassody Katha v Primathie Pillay N.O. and Others (276/2024)

Hassody Katha v Primathie Pillay N.O. and Others (276/2024) [2025] ZASCA 106 (18 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

276/2024

Judges

Matojane, Koen, Dlodlo, Dawood, Steyn

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the phrase 'superior force' in section 3(1)(a) of the Prescription Act 68 of 1969 must be interpreted contextually and purposively, in line with constitutional principles protecting property rights. Death is an unforeseeable and uncontrollable event that objectively prevents the registered owner from acting to interrupt prescription. Therefore, death constitutes a 'superior force' under the Act, suspending the running of acquisitive prescription. The legislative purpose is to prevent arbitrary deprivation of property rights and to ensure an equitable bala…

Source excerpt

• Acquisitive Prescription
• Prescription Act 68 Of 1969
• Superior Force
• Statutory Interpretation
• Property Rights
• Force Majeure

Hlamandana and Another v Premier, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2227/2023)

Hlamandana and Another v Premier, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2227/2023) [2025] ZAECMHC 61 (8 July 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

2227/2023

Judge

Zono

The court found that the applicants' grounds for leave to appeal were without merit. The remittal order was justified under Section 8(1)(c)(i) of PAJA and Section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution, which empower courts to grant just and equitable remedies, including remittal for reconsideration by the administrator. The applicants' argument that the remittal was not sought by any party was rejected, as the relief sought was broad enough to encompass such an order. The court held that the fourth respondent was lawfully appointed and the proceedings were still extant, thus he was not functus offici…

Source excerpt

• Remittal Of Administrative Action
• Just And Equitable Remedy
• Judicial Review
• Punitive Costs
• Statutory Interpretation

Thulare v Thulare and Others (470/2023)

Thulare v Thulare and Others (470/2023) [2025] ZASCA 100 (7 July 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

470/2023

Judges

Zondi, Keightley, Unterhalter, Steyn, Henney

The Supreme Court of Appeal upheld an appeal over who may identify an acting Bapedi monarch, holding that custom had to be proved by evidence and remitting the matter for oral evidence.

• Traditional Leadership
• Customary Law Evidence
• Statutory Interpretation
• Interim Relief
• Remittal For Oral Evidence
• Customary-law

Abrahams and Others v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (A216/2024)

Abrahams and Others v Health Professions Council of South Africa and Others (A216/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 666 (1 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A216/2024

Judges

Mudau, Davis

The High Court upheld an appeal by six medical technologists, setting aside HPCSA findings that they had engaged in an undesirable business practice and allowed themselves to be exploited.

• Health Professions Act
• Disciplinary Appeal
• Ethical Rules
• Statutory Interpretation
• Health-professions-act
• Disciplinary-appeal

Standard Bank of South Africa v South African Reserve Bank and Others (047643/2023)

Standard Bank of South Africa v South African Reserve Bank and Others (047643/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 481 (15 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

047643/2023

Judge

M P Motha

The court found that the applicant lacked locus standi to challenge the forfeiture of the R10 million in the Nedbank Limited account, as the funds belonged to LCC and the applicant's interest was merely speculative. Regarding the Money Market Account, the court held that the Exchange Control Regulations, as currently drafted, do not apply to cryptocurrency transactions or assets, as cryptocurrency is not recognized as currency or legal tender in South Africa. The court emphasized the need for a restrictive interpretation of penal statutes and found no evidence of contravention of the Exchange…

Source excerpt

• Exchange Control Regulations
• Cryptocurrency Regulation
• Forfeiture Of Funds
• Locus Standi
• Pledge And Cession
• Statutory Interpretation

S v Serache and Others (Review) (HC12/2025)

S v Serache and Others (Review) (HC12/2025) [2025] ZANWHC 75; 2025 (2) SACR 61 (NWM) (6 May 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

HC12/2025

Judges

Reddy, Morgan, Titus

The majority of the Court held that the absence of a Fidelity Fund Certificate by the accused's legal representative does not constitute a gross irregularity or render the criminal proceedings a nullity. The legislative intent behind section 84(1) of the Legal Practice Act is to protect the public from financial misconduct, not to regulate the competence of legal practitioners in court. Disciplinary and criminal sanctions are the appropriate consequences for non-compliance, not the invalidation of judicial proceedings. There was no evidence that the accused's right to a fair trial was prejudi…

Source excerpt

• Legal Representation
• Fidelity Fund Certificate
• Fair Trial Rights
• Gross Irregularity
• Statutory Interpretation

Minerva Bunkering Marine Services (Pty) Ltd v Acting Chief Executive Officer of the South African Maritime Safety Authority and Others (3683/2022)

Minerva Bunkering Marine Services (Pty) Ltd v Acting Chief Executive Officer of the South African Maritime Safety Authority and Others (3683/2022) [2025] ZAECQBHC 9 (2 May 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

3683/2022

Judge

O H Ronaasen

The court set aside SAMSA’s withdrawal of Minerva’s ship-to-ship bunkering approval, held the approval covered all three transfer legs, and reinstated it.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Marine Pollution Control
• Ship To Ship Bunkering
• Statutory Interpretation
• Functus Officio
• Administrative Consistency

Tetra4 (Pty) Ltd v National Energy Regulator and Another (60924/21)

Tetra4 (Pty) Ltd v National Energy Regulator and Another (60924/21) [2025] ZAGPPHC 425 (2 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

60924/21

Judge

E van der Schyff

The court held that the Gas Act 48 of 2001 does not apply to the production of gas and activities incidental thereto conducted under a Production Right issued in terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act. The definition of 'gas' in the Gas Act is limited to hydrocarbon gases transported by pipeline, and the Act's regulatory scope is confined to midstream and downstream activities, excluding upstream production. The court found that Tetra4's operations, including gathering, processing, and liquefaction within its production area, are upstream activities not regulated by NERS…

Source excerpt

• Statutory Interpretation
• Regulatory Scope
• Licensing Requirements
• Petroleum Production
• Gas Industry Regulation