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/
8 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
8 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 2011
HBR (Hola Bon Renaissance) Foundation v President of Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT 11/11) [2011] ZACC 10 (31 March 2011)
Reported
Direct-access application to compel municipal demarcation tribunal and Soweto municipality dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and prospects.
Constitutional Court — direct access — Rule 18 compliance and interests of justice; municipal demarcation — authority to establish municipalities vests in provinces; removal of demarcation board members — requires misconduct, incapacity or incompetence and tribunal process under Municipal Demarcation Act; merits — lack of prospects of success.
 31 March 2011
Minister for Correctional Services and Another v Van Vuren and Another In re: Van Vuren v Minister for Correctional Services and Others [2011] ZACC 9 (31 March 2011)
Reported
The court refused to require NCCS recommendations before the Minister considers parole for certain life‑sentenced offenders.
Constitutional Court — parole and life sentences — interpretation of prior order — whether National Council for Correctional Services recommendation required before Minister may consider parole — rule 42(1) variation — functus officio — administrative action.
 31 March 2011
Residents of Joe Slovo Community, Western Cape v Thebelisha Homes and Others [2011] ZACC 8 (31 March 2011)
Reported
Court discharged the supervised eviction order against the applicants due to changed circumstances; the costs order remains.
Constitutional and property law – PIE and section 26(3) – scope to discharge or vary supervised eviction orders when circumstances change. Judicial finality versus changing facts – exceptional circumstances test for rescission of orders. Housing redevelopment – in situ upgrading vs relocation; implementation failures may render eviction orders unjust and inequitable. Costs orders – final costs directions are not easily susceptible to discharge alongside substantive orders.
 31 March 2011
S v S (CCT 63/10) [2011] ZACC 7 (29 March 2011)
Reported
Whether sentencing courts considered the children's best interests when sentencing a primary caregiver.
Criminal law — Sentencing — Primary caregiver — Constitutional duty under s 28 to consider children's best interests — S v M guidelines on when and how courts must inquire into primary-caregiver status and adequacy of alternative care — Application to custodial sentences and consideration of correctional supervision under s 276.
 29 March 2011
Glenister v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2011] ZACC 6 (17 March 2011)
Reported
17 March 2011
Viking Pony Africa Pumps (Pty) Ltd t/a Tricom Africa v Hidro-Tech Systems (Pty) Ltd and Another (CCT 34/10) [2011] ZACC 5 (10 March 2011)
Reported
City not ordered to pay applicant’s costs, but must pay first respondent’s costs in this Court due to its failure to investigate.
Costs — provisional costs order — public authority’s non‑participation where it implemented High Court findings — legitimate reason not to burden public purse — failure to investigate gives rise to costs liability to successful litigant.
 10 March 2011
Le Roux and Another v Dey (CCT 45/10) [2011] ZACC 4 (8 March 2011)
Reported
Whether a sexually manipulated image by pupils defamed a teacher, how children’s rights affect meaning, wrongfulness and damages.
Defamation — pictorial publication by schoolchildren — meaning and context of image — balancing freedom of expression, dignity and children’s rights — animus iniuriandi and knowledge of wrongfulness — duplication of actions (defamation and iniuria) — quantum and role of apology/restorative measures.
 8 March 2011
Mankayi v AngloGold Ashanti Limited (CCT 40/10) [2011] ZACC 3 (3 March 2011)
Reported
Section 35(1) COIDA does not extinguish common-law claims of mineworkers excluded from COIDA by ODIMWA.
Compensation law — Interpretation of s35(1) COIDA — Relationship between COIDA and ODIMWA — Whether COIDA’s substitutionary bar extinguishes common-law claims of mineworkers excluded from COIDA by s100(2) ODIMWA — Constitutional implications (s12 right to security of person; s38 effective remedies).
 3 March 2011