This document is 571.4 KB. Do you want to load it?
Cited documents 26
Judgment
18
Reported
|
Reported
Section 8(1)(c)(ii)(aa) of the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 — test for exceptional circumstances. Court in as good a place as the administrator — decision of the administrator is a foregone conclusion — considerations of fairness weigh in favour of substitution order — exceptional circumstances warrant substitution order. Standard of appellate court interference — discretion in the true sense. |
Reported
|
Reported
|
Reported
|
Reported
|
Reported
|
Reported
|
Reported
|
Reported
Administrative Law — Administrative Action
·
Commercial — Constitutional Law
·
Refugees
|
Act
7
Citizenship and Immigration
·
Education
·
Environment, Climate and Wildlife
·
Health and Food Safety
·
Human Rights
·
International Law
·
Labour and Employment
·
Public administration
|
Finance and Money
|
Dispute Resolution and Mediation
·
Human Rights
|
Business, Trade and Industry
·
Finance and Money
·
Labour and Employment
·
Public administration
|
Business, Trade and Industry
·
Finance and Money
·
Infrastructure and Transportation
|
Government Notice
1Documents citing this one 10
Judgment
10
Reported
|
Reported
|
Exercise of power by Minister under s 5 of the Preferential |
Reported
|
Land – land reform – Extension of Security of Tenure Act 62 of 1997 (ESTA) – whether eviction order just and equitable – fundamental breach of relationship between occupier and owner under s 10(1)(c) – occupier unlawfully removing building materials and erecting illegal structure on land – fundamental breach of relationship justifying eviction – opportunity for representations under s 8(1)(e) of ESTA – not required in the circumstances – appeal upheld. |
Procurement – Section 217(1) of the Constitution – whether a tripartite agreement between two organs of state and a private entity was one that contemplated contracting for goods or services – the agreement, in furtherance of the objects of the organs of state, required the private entity to provide smallholder farmers with cattle, paid for with public funds, veterinary kits and feed supplements, and to provide training and mentorship – the agreement was for the provision of goods and services as contemplated by s 217(1) – no procurement process complying with s 217(1) preceded the agreement – the agreement was declared to be invalid. |