Constitutional Court of South Africa - 2011 August

Sort by:

5 judgments

Citation	Judgment date
August 2011
Haffejee NO and Others v eThekwini Municipality and Others [2011] ZACC 28 (25 August 2011) Reported Section 25(2)(b) does not always require compensation be determined before expropriation; post‑expropriation compensation must be fixed promptly. Constitutional property law – Expropriation – Timing of compensation under section 25(2)(b) – Determination before or after expropriation – Requirement that post‑expropriation compensation be fixed promptly and evictions occur only by agreement or under court supervision – Interaction with section 25(3) and section 26(3).	25 August 2011
Moutse Demarcation Forum and Others v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2011] ZACC 27 (23 August 2011) Reported Court dismissed challenge to amendment relocating Moutse areas, finding rationality and reasonable public participation. Constitutional law — Amendment of Constitution — Twelfth Amendment and Repeal Act — abolition of cross-boundary municipalities and redrawing provincial boundaries; Administrative law/Constitutional procedure — public participation — section 118 obligation of provincial legislatures — reasonableness standard for facilitation; Constitutional review — rationality test — connection between measure and legitimate government purpose; Remedies — leave to file supplemental affidavit; costs limited for postponements.	23 August 2011
Falk and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions [2011] ZACC 26 (16 August 2011) Reported Registration under ICCMA governs foreign restraint orders; ancillary POCA interdicts may follow and are not easily rescinded. International co-operation – registration and enforcement of foreign restraint orders – ICCMA s24-26; Relationship between ICCMA and POCA – registration gives foreign order the effect of a POCA restraint order but remains foreign; Ancillary relief under POCA s26(8) – valid to render registered foreign orders effective and may follow registration; Setting aside registration – only under ICCMA s26(1), including 'interests of justice' enquiry; Rescission – POCA s26(10)(b) applies to domestic restraint orders, not ancillary orders; Constitutional issue – interpretation must avoid arbitrary deprivation of property (s25) and promote Bill of Rights values (s39(2)).	16 August 2011
Premier: Limpopo Province v Speaker: Limpopo Provincial Legislature and Others (94/10) [2011] ZACC 25 (11 August 2011) Reported The Court held provincial legislatures lack an express constitutional power to legislate their own financial management. Constitutional law — Division of legislative powers — s104(1)(b)(iii)-(iv) — "expressly assigned" requires clear, unambiguous legislative assignment by Parliament; "envisages" under s104(1)(b)(iv) does not permit mere implication that provinces may legislate — constitutional provisions on financial management (ss195,215,216) do not, in clear terms, envisage provincial legislation to regulate provincial legislatures' financial management; FMPA s2(e), s3 and Schedule 1 do not expressly assign the power — Bill unconstitutional; Court may reach substantially similar provincial statutes and join affected parties.	11 August 2011
Naidoo and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another [2011] ZACC 24 (10 August 2011) Reported Section 26(6) permits legal expense payments only from property held by the person against whom that restraint order was made. POCA – restraint orders – section 26(6) – limited provision for reasonable legal and living expenses only in respect of person against whom restraint order is made – affected gifts and realisable property – section 26(1) cannot override section 26(6) safeguards – balancing asset preservation and fair-trial rights.	10 August 2011