Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search
background image
profile image

Constitutional Court of South Africa

The Constitutional Court of South Africa is a supreme constitutional court established by the Constitution of South Africa, and is the apex court in the South African judicial system, with general jurisdiction. The Court was first established by the Interim Constitution of 1993, and its first session began in February 1995. It has continued in existence under the Constitution of 1996. The Court sits in the city of Johannesburg. The Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to hear any matter if it is in the interests of justice for it to do so. (Banner image credit: By André-Pierre from Stellenbosch, South Africa.)
Physical address
Constitutional Court, 1 Hospital Street, Constitution Hill, Braamfontein, South Africa, 2017
Visit website
https://www.concourt.org.za/
3 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
3 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
April 2007
Barkhuizen v Napier [2007] ZACC 5 (4 April 2007)
Reported
A contractual 90‑day time‑bar is tested against public policy informed by the Constitution; on these facts it was enforceable.
Constitutional law – contracts – time‑limitation (vexata) clauses in standard form insurance policies – whether clause barring suit unless summons served within 90 days of repudiation offends public policy and right of access to courts (s 34). Constitutional horizontality – proper approach is to test contractual terms against public policy informed by constitutional values (indirect application) and develop common law accordingly. Test: Mohlomi standard – clause must afford an adequate and fair opportunity to seek judicial redress; assess objective unreasonableness and, if not manifest, whether enforcement would be unfair in light of reasons for non‑compliance. Consumer/standard‑form concerns – small print, unilateral clauses, and relative bargaining power relevant to fairness/enforceability.
 4 April 2007
N M and Others v Smith and Others [2007] ZACC 6 (4 April 2007)
Reported
Publication of private HIV status without informed consent unlawfully infringed applicants’ privacy and dignity; respondents ordered to pay R35,000 each.
Privacy – private medical information – disclosure of HIV status; requirement of express informed consent absent compelling public interest. Dignity – unlawful disclosure of private medical facts may violate dignity and psychological integrity. Actio iniuriarum – wrongful publication of private facts; interplay of wrongfulness, fault (animus iniuriandi) and possible development of negligence standard for media/publishers. Media standard – heightened obligations on journalists/publishers to verify consent and minimize harm. Remedies – damages, deletion of names from unsold copies, and costs consequences of Rule 34 offers.
 4 April 2007
Road Accident Fund v Mdeyide [2007] ZACC 7 (4 April 2007)
Reported
Remitted for a Rule 57 inquiry into claimant’s capacity before confirming constitutional invalidity of RAF Act prescription provision.
Prescription law – Road Accident Fund Act s23(1) – three-year absolute prescription where identity of driver/owner established – constitutionality challenged under right of access to courts. Prescription Act – ss12(3) and 13(1)(a) – knowledge-based commencement and protection for persons incapable of managing affairs (insane/under curatorship). Procedural fairness – requirement to join Minister responsible for administration when statute’s validity is challenged; condonation for late intervention. Capacity to litigate – necessity of inquiry under Uniform Rule 57 and possible appointment of curator ad litem/curator bonis before deciding prescription or constitutional questions. Remittal – appellate court may set aside premature constitutional declaration and remit for fact-finding and proper procedure before constitutional review.
 4 April 2007