|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2015 |
|
|
A visa facilitation contractor must accept and forward applications; the State cannot use outsourcing to deny access to administrative remedies.
Immigration law; administrative law – private contractor performing public function; services agreement clause requiring acceptance of applications; unlawful Departmental instruction; outsourcing does not remove State obligations; duty to permit access to review and renewal processes.
|
15 December 2015 |
|
Property that is itself the object of theft is not an "instrumentality" for forfeiture under POCA.
POCA — definition and scope of "instrumentality of an offence" — requires property to have been used to facilitate commission of the offence — property that is the object of theft is not an instrumentality — preservation and forfeiture orders lack jurisdiction where this functional link is absent.
|
8 December 2015 |
| October 2015 |
|
|
Reported
Conditional re-zoning subject to removal of title restrictions and special consent granted without required procedure are unlawful.
Land use planning — LUPO ss 36, 39, 42 — re-zoning — permissibility of conditional re-zoning subject to removal of restrictive title condition — s 42 conditions as recorded departures — re-zoning vests immediate use rights — restrictive title conditions prevail and must be considered; zoning scheme procedure — special consent — mandatory application, notice and advertising requirements; delegation — municipal manager authorised to institute review.
|
20 October 2015 |
| August 2015 |
|
|
Reported
High Court lacked Rule 43 jurisdiction while divorce proceedings remained pending in the Regional Court; application dismissed.
* Family law – Rule 43 (High Court) and Rule 58 (Magistrates’/Regional Court) – Rule 43 relief competent only in the court where main lis pending.
* Inherent jurisdiction – High Court as upper guardian – may intervene for minor’s protection but only in exceptional and urgent cases; distinct from Rule 43.
* Jurisdictional conflict – court will decline to exercise inherent jurisdiction to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
* Withdrawal of Magistrates’/Regional Court proceedings – Rule 22 preserves costs determination; tender from the Bar ineffective to terminate proceedings.
* Abuse of process – prolix, incompetent relief and forum-shopping warrant dismissal and punitive costs.
|
13 August 2015 |
| July 2015 |
|
|
Reported
Challenges to property ratings based on valuation/categorisation must be pleaded as PAJA review claims; particulars failed to disclose a cause of action.
* Municipal law – Rates Act – distinction between legislative act (rates policy and council resolution to levy rates) and administrative action (valuation, categorisation and compilation of valuation roll by municipal valuer).
* Administrative law – PAJA – challenges to valuation and categorisation must be pleaded and pursued under PAJA, observing the 180‑day time limit or alleging facts for extension.
* Civil procedure – exception – particulars failing to plead required review grounds do not disclose a cause of action; collateral challenge inappropriate where review remedies available.
* Statutory procedure – s 49 notice, objection and appeal processes and s 55 adjustments central to challenging assessed rates.
|
28 July 2015 |
|
Court awarded R14,000 monthly maintenance recognising substantial non‑financial contributions to spouse’s business under s7(2) of the Divorce Act.
* Family law – Divorce – Maintenance – section 7(2) of the Divorce Act – court to consider existing/prospective means, earning capacities, needs, duration of marriage, standard of living, conduct and any other relevant factors.
* Family law – Non‑financial contributions – substantial administrative and managerial contributions to spouse’s business may justify maintenance despite antenuptial contract excluding accrual.
* Civil procedure – Costs – costs consequences for withdrawn counterclaim, amendments and exceptions ordered against the defendant by agreement.
|
2 July 2015 |
| June 2015 |
|
|
Applicant’s review deemed withdrawn and struck from the roll for late filing contrary to the practice manual.
* Practice manual – consolidated practice manual – directives issued by Judge President – binding effect. * Civil procedure – review of arbitration award – filing record within prescribed 60 days – clause 11.2.2/11.2.3. * Meaning of 'deemed' – conclusive effect – deemed withdrawal for non-compliance. * Remedy – striking review from roll; right to seek reinstatement and condonation preserved.
|
17 June 2015 |
| May 2015 |
|
|
An express contractual warranty against political interference was breached, entitling the municipal manager to damages.
Contract/employment – Municipal manager’s fixed-term contract – Clause warranting no undue political interference – Undue interference by executive mayor and deputy – Material breach rendering performance impossible – Resignation and damages; Defendant failed to call evidence or cross-examine; Court allowed amendment to particulars and awarded damages and costs.
|
19 May 2015 |
|
Accused charged under Schedule 6 failed to show exceptional circumstances for bail; untested affidavit insufficient.
* Criminal procedure – Bail – Schedule 6 offences – Section 60(11)(a) requires accused to adduce evidence of exceptional circumstances to justify bail. * Evidentiary procedure – Affidavit alone insufficient where State leads conflicting oral evidence and accused does not testify or face cross-examination. * Appeal review – Under section 65(4) appellate court will not set aside lower court's bail refusal unless satisfied it was wrong.
|
19 May 2015 |
|
Rule 4(9) does not permit State Attorney service where a public official is cited; service was ineffective.
Uniform Rules of Court — rule 4(9) — meaning of "the State" — does not include officers/servants or general organs of state; service on State Attorney ineffective where public official cited in official capacity; service must comply with rule 4(1); application struck off roll.
|
7 May 2015 |
| March 2015 |
|
|
A child's wholly suspended imprisonment sentence is a 'form of imprisonment' and is subject to automatic review under the Child Justice Act.
Child Justice Act s85(1) – meaning of 'any form of imprisonment' – wholly suspended sentence included – automatic review under Chapter 30 Criminal Procedure Act; Jaga precedent applied; statutory purpose to protect children.
|
4 March 2015 |