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/
4 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Topics
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
4 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 2014
Mdodana v Premier of the Eastern Cape and Others [2014] ZACC 7 (25 March 2014)
Reported
Confirmation dismissed: Pounds Ordinance not a provincial Act, so Constitutional Court lacked jurisdiction to confirm.
Constitutional law — Confirmation jurisdiction — Whether a pre‑constitutional Pounds Ordinance is a "provincial Act" under ss 167(5) and 172(2)(a); Property and access to courts — impoundment, sale and destruction of livestock without judicial supervision; Equality — discriminatory provisions affecting landless stockowners; Separation of powers — confirmation requirement confined to Acts of Parliament, provincial Acts and presidential conduct.
 25 March 2014
MEC for Health, Eastern Cape and Another v Kirland Investments (Pty) Ltd (77/13) [2014] ZACC 6 (25 March 2014)
Reported
Unlawful administrative approvals remain effectual until set aside; administration should bring formal review to impugn them.
Administrative law — unlawful political dictation — validity of administrative approvals — effect of unlawful administrative action — whether an unlawful decision remains effectual until set aside — duty of organ of state to bring review/counter‑application — role of PAJA and section 172 remedial discretion — remittal vs substitution.
 25 March 2014
Loureiro and Others v iMvula Quality Protection (Pty) Ltd [2014] ZACC 4 (20 March 2014)
Reported
A security company is contractually and delictually liable when its guard admits robbers contrary to an express prohibition.
Private security industry; contract – express prohibition in guarding agreement and strict liability; contract breach by admitting unauthorised persons; delict – wrongfulness informed by constitutional norms; negligence of security guards; vicarious liability of security companies; role of public policy in imposing liability.
 20 March 2014
Savoi and Others v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another [2014] ZACC 5 (20 March 2014)
Reported
Applicants’ constitutional challenges to POCA’s definitions, evidentiary provision and retrospectivity dismissed; High Court’s severance not confirmed.
Criminal law – Prevention of Organised Crime Act – Definitions: "pattern of racketeering activity" and "enterprise" – vagueness and overbreadth challenge dismissed; Evidence – s 2(2) POCA permits otherwise inadmissible hearsay, similar-fact and previous-conviction evidence subject to proviso preserving fair trial – admissibility assessed case-by-case; Retrospectivity – Chapter 2 not retrospective as conviction requires post-enactment pattern; Fault element – phrase "ought reasonably to have known" denotes negligence standard and is constitutionally valid; Standing and abstract challenges – permissible but carry heavy burden
 20 March 2014