Smit v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others [2020] ZACC 29 (18 December 2020)

Reported
Smit v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others [2020] ZACC 29 (18 December 2020)

Loading PDF...

This document is 476.8 KB. Do you want to load it?

Error loading PDF
Try reloading the page or downloading the PDF.
Error:
▲ To the top

Cited documents 42

Judgment
39
Reported
Reported
Reported
Reported
Reported
Reported
Reported
Reported
Reported

Contract — breach — oral agreement to negotiate in good faith

Pleadings — Ostensible authority — Distinct from estoppel — Not necessary to plead ostensible authority in replication

Prescription Act 68 of 1969 — Sections 10(1), 11(d), 129(d) — interpretation of “debt”

Constitution — Section 39(2) — Narrow interpretation of “debt” —claim not prescribed

Reported
Act
3
Citizenship and Immigration · Education · Environment, Climate and Wildlife · Health and Food Safety · Human Rights · International Law · Labour and Employment · Public administration
Dispute Resolution and Mediation · Peace and Security

Documents citing this one 14

Judgment
13
Reported

Rule of law — judicial integrity — vindicating the honour of courts

Contempt of court — urgent application — direct access — duty to comply with court orders — first respondent is in contempt of court

Appropriate sanction for crime of civil contempt — punitive sanction — unsuspended committal — punitive costs

Criminal procedure – appeal in terms of s 311 of Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 – constitution of trial court in terms of s 93ter(1) of Magistrates’ Courts Act 32 of 1944 –– whether peremptory requirements of s 93ter(1) satisfied – duties of magistrate when accused represented– appeal upheld – conviction and sentence reinstated

 

Reported

Extradition Act 67 of 1962 – validity of arrest in terms of
s 5(1)(b) of the Act – whether officials gave an undertaking not to arrest
the appellant – whether any such undertaking was capable of binding the
State – whether undertaking invalidates an arrest pursuant to an otherwise
valid warrant.
Affidavit in support of application for issue of a warrant of arrest in terms
of s 5(1)(b) of Act – attested before another policeman employed in the
same bureau – Regulation 7 of Regulation governing the administering of
an oath or affirmation under the Justices of the Peace and Commissioners
of Oaths Act 16 of 1963 – whether oath properly administered.
Whether magistrate applied her mind to issue of warrant or 'rubber-
stamped' it – failure to notify the Minister of Justice of issue of warrant in
terms of s 8(1) of the Act – effect

Reported

Customs and Excise Act 91 of 1964 — Value Added tax Act 89 of 1991 — Constitutionality of section 75(15)(a)(i)(bb) of the Customs Act — Constitutionality of section 74(3)(a) of the VAT Act

Sections delegate plenary legislative power to the Minister — Breach of doctrine of separation of powers — Rationality — Section 77 of the Constitution

Statutory interpretation – s 59(3) of the Defence Act 42 of 2002 – jurisdictional requirements – officers of South African National Defence Force discharged after absenting themselves from official duty – whether they were entitled to hearing – whether discharge lawful.

Constitutional law – section 27 of the Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 – constitutional challenge – whether delegation of plenary legislative power impermissible – whether declaration of state of disaster in effect a de facto state of emergency – whether parliamentary oversight of the executive during state of disaster constitutionally compliant

 

Constitutional law – COVID-19 pandemic – regulation made under Disaster Management Act 57 of 2002 (the Act) – prohibiting sale of tobacco and related products – challenged as infringement of fundamental rights – dignity, bodily and psychological integrity, freedom of trade and deprivation of property – limitation under s 36 of Constitution – to reduce strain on health system – not established – interpretation of ss 27(2)(n) and 27(3) of the Act – tobacco ban unnecessary – appeal dismissed.

Provisional sequestration order sought on the grounds of s 83 and s 84 of the Banks Act 94 of 1990 – prima facie proof of non-compliance with the Prudential Authority’s directive issued under s 83 sufficient to found sequestration application – the fact that reliance was also placed on s 84 to establish insolvency of the respondents is of no moment as long it is shown on either ground that sequestration will be to the advantage of creditors – appeal against refusal to grant provisional sequestration upheld

Section 5(1)(a) of the Extradition Act 67 of 1962 - finding of constitutional invalidity does not apply retrospectively – held that Constitutional Court’s order was prospective in effect