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/
6 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
6 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
June 2007
Minister of Safety and Security v Van Niekerk [2007] ZACC 15 (8 June 2007)
Reported
Constitutional Court refuses leave to appeal, holding arrest-lawfulness is fact-specific and best governed by standing orders and regulation.
Constitutional and criminal procedure — Arrest powers (s40 Criminal Procedure Act) — Whether written notice must precede summary arrest — Balance between individual dignity/liberty and police duty to maintain order — Fact-specific nature of arrest-lawfulness — Role of standing orders and internal regulation.
 8 June 2007
Shilubana and Others v Nwamitwa (CCT 03/07) [2007] ZACC 14 (8 June 2007)
Reported
Hearing postponed due to respondent’s inadequate representation and the wider interests of justice.
Constitutional procedure – application for postponement – factors: timeliness, explanation, prejudice, public interest and prospects on merits; customary law – dispute over traditional leadership and gender equality; legal representation – State Attorney authority to represent non‑governmental applicants not decided for lack of procedural notice; equality of arms – relevance but not dispositive; costs reserved.
 8 June 2007
Fuel Retailers Association of Southern Africa v Director-General: Environmental Management, Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, Mpumalanga Province and Others [2007] ZACC 13 (7 June 2007)
Reported
Environmental authorities must independently assess socio‑economic and cumulative environmental impacts before granting authorisation.
Environmental law – NEMA principles – obligation of environmental authorities to consider socio‑economic impacts and cumulative effects when authorising listed activities under ECA. Administrative law – PAJA s6(2)(b)/(e)(iii) – failure to comply with mandatory and material procedures and failure to consider relevant considerations renders administrative action reviewable. Sustainable development – integration of environmental protection and socio‑economic development; cumulative impact assessment and the precautionary approach. Delegation – environmental authorities cannot avoid NEMA duties by relying solely on municipal rezoning/need and desirability assessments.
 7 June 2007
University of Witwatersrand Law Clinic v Minister of Home Affairs and Others [2007] ZACC 8 (7 June 2007)
Reported
An amicus cannot prosecute or bejoined for a direct Constitutional Court appeal while a party’s leave application is pending.
Constitutional procedure – Direct appeals to Constitutional Court – Whether direct leave should be granted while leave to appeal is pending in another court – interests of justice assessment. Civil procedure – Role of amicus curiae – an amicus may not displace the dominus litis; parties must launch their own appeals. Court rules – Rule 19(3)(d) – duty to disclose pending applications for leave to appeal to other courts to avoid duplication.
 7 June 2007
Department of Land Affairs and Others v Goedgelegen Tropical Fruits (Pty) Ltd [2007] ZACC 12 (6 June 2007)
Reported
Applicants dispossessed as labour tenants after 1913 are entitled to restitution where racist state laws enabled their dispossession.
Restitution of land rights; interpretation of "as a result of" in Restitution Act; causal standard for dispossession — purposive, context-sensitive ‘as a consequence of’ test; communal versus individual labour-tenancy rights; apartheid-era statutory and policy framework as enabler of private dispossession; remedy limited to declaratory relief with implementation by Department/Land Claims Court.
 6 June 2007
Van Vuren v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Another [2007] ZACC 11 (1 June 2007)
Reported
Direct access to challenge parole-eligibility provision refused; applicant directed to pursue properly formulated High Court proceedings.
Constitutional procedure – Direct access – section 167(6)(a) – exceptional circumstances and interests of justice required before granting direct access.* Prisoners and parole – Parole eligibility – retrospective effect of legislative change (section 136(3)(a)) and application to prisoners sentenced before commencement.* Sentences – Application of amnesty/credits to life sentences and effect on parole consideration.* Civil procedure – Appropriate forum – Constitutional Court should not ordinarily sit as court of first instance; complex, fact-dependent claims belong in the High Court.* Professional assistance – Registrar to notify Law Society to consider legal assistance for incarcerated litigant.
 1 June 2007