Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

Administrative action

12 documents
Advanced search
Filters
Administrative action
  • Filters
  • Years
  • Topics
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
12 documents
Title
Jurisdiction
Date
B A v Minister of Home Affairs and Others [2023] ZACC 16 (12 June 2023)
Reported

Section 12(1) of the Constitution — principle of non-refoulement — section 49(1) and 34 of the Immigration Act 13 of 2002 — illegal foreigner’s intention to apply for asylum — lawfulness of detention.

 Judgment 12 June 2023
C N and Others v Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs and Others (75188/2019) [2022] ZAGPPHC 1185 (14 February 2022)
Review of SCRA withdrawal of refugee status dismissed due to misleading submissions and failure to justify procedural delay.
Refugee law – withdrawal of refugee status under s36 read with s5(1)(e) – review confined to administrative record – PAJA condonation – misrepresentation/irrelevant country evidence – procedural fairness.
 Gauteng Judgment 14 February 2022
D A v Minister of Home Affairs and Another [2021] ZACC 50 (30 December 2021)
Reported
An aspirant asylum seeker who expresses intent must be afforded an opportunity to apply; non‑refoulement prevails despite amendments.
Refugee law — applicability of Refugees Amendment Act (2017) and new Regulations — interaction with section 2 non‑refoulement; whether an illegal foreigner who expresses an intention to apply for asylum must be afforded the opportunity to apply; effect of delay in evincing intention; requirement for immigration officer interview and showing good cause for lack of asylum transit visa; lawfulness of detention.
 Judgment 30 December 2021
Somali Association of South Africa and Others v Refugee Appeal Board and Others (585/2020) [2021] ZASCA 124 (23 September 2021)
Reported
Decision‑makers must assist asylum seekers, consider s 3(a) and s 3(b), and observe audi and a flexible proof standard.
Refugee law — Refugee status determinations — Duty on RRO/RSDO/Appeals Authority to assist applicants and to gather and test relevant evidence; consider both s 3(a) and s 3(b) of the Refugees Act; credibility is one factor within a flexible, inquisitorial assessment; procedural fairness (audi) requires disclosure of adverse country‑of‑origin information and opportunity to respond.
 Judgment 23 September 2021
A I and Others v Director of Asylum Seeker Management: Department of Home Affairs and Others (22059 of 2018) [2019] ZAWCHC 114 (2 September 2019)
Applicants whose new asylum applications were refused are entitled to section 22 permits pending determination of their claims.
Refugee law – section 22 asylum seeker permits – entitlement where State refuses to accept/consider new (sur place) asylum applications; administrative law – failure to take a decision reviewable under PAJA; relationship between Refugees Act and Immigration Act – Refugees Act not displaced; interim relief/urgency.
 Western Cape Judgment 2 September 2019
A R v Minister of Home Affairs (CCT 02/18) [2018] ZACC 52 (20 December 2018)
Reported
Delay does not bar asylum applications; Refugees Act (non‑refoulement) prevails and RSDO alone decides refugee status.
Refugee law — non‑refoulement and section 2 of the Refugees Act — primacy over conflicting statutes; access to asylum process — delay and false documents relevant to credibility but not absolute bars; Refugee Status Determination Officer sole authority to determine refugee status; exclusionary clause s4(1)(b) applies to crimes committed outside the refuge country; Immigration Act must be read harmoniously with the Refugees Act.
 Judgment 20 December 2018
D G v Refugee Status Determination Officer, Cape Town and Others (CCT 217/16) [2018] ZACC 38 (28 September 2018)
Reported
The court held section 4(1)(b) of the Refugees Act constitutional, but found procedural unfairness in excluding the applicant.
Refugees Act – Section 4(1)(b) exclusion – Constitutionality – Procedural fairness in asylum decisions – Internal remedies and appeals.
 Judgment 28 September 2018
Saidi and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others [2018] ZACC 9 (24 April 2018)
Reported
An RRO may extend an asylum permit pending PAJA review; majority held renewal is obligatory until review finalises.
Refugee law – interpretation of section 22(1) and (3) of the Refugees Act – whether ‘outcome’ includes PAJA judicial review – non‑refoulement and purposive/constitutional statutory interpretation – obligation v discretion of Refugee Reception Officer to extend temporary permits pending review – protection of access to court, life, dignity and freedom and security of the person.
 Judgment 24 April 2018
Minister of Home Affairs and Others v Somali Association of South Africa Eastern Cape (SASA EC) and Another (831/2013) [2015] ZASCA 35 (25 March 2015)
Reported
Director‑General’s closure of a refugee reception office was unlawful, irrational and required restoration plus supervisory reporting.
Administrative law – Refugees Act – closure of Refugee Reception Office – duty to consult interested parties before deciding to close – requirement of rationality and decision‑making free of material mistake of fact; contempt/non‑compliance with court orders – appropriateness of supervisory/structural relief and reporting obligations; access to asylum procedures and protection of vulnerable asylum seekers.
 Judgment 25 March 2015
Mail and Guardian Media Ltd and Others v Chipu NO and Others [2013] ZACC 32 (27 September 2013)
Reported
Blanket confidentiality of asylum applications is overbroad; Appeal Board must have discretion to allow media/public access.
Refugee law — confidentiality of asylum applications; Constitutional law — limitation of freedom of expression under section 36; Proportionality — overbreadth of blanket confidentiality; Remedy — declaration of invalidity suspended; interim reading‑in conferring discretion on Refugee Appeal Board.
 Judgment 27 September 2013
K E v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (69/2012) [2012] ZASCA 31 (28 March 2012)
Reported
An illegal foreigner who indicates an intention to seek asylum is entitled to a 14‑day transit permit and protection from deportation.
Immigration law – interaction with refugee law – regulation 2(2) of Refugee Regulations – entitlement to 14‑day asylum transit permit where an illegal foreigner indicates intention to apply for asylum. Refugee law – application after arrest – once intention to apply is evinced, protection of Refugees Act (including s 21(4) and s 22) applies and bars deportation while application is pending. Administrative law – delay in applying for asylum – mere delay is not a statutory ground to refuse an otherwise meritorious asylum claim. Procedural – declaratory relief as to lawfulness of initial arrest declined where not sought and similar issues decided in prior cases.
 Judgment 28 March 2012
Fang v Refugee Appeal Board and Others (40771/05) [2006] ZATPD 1 (15 November 2006)
Applicant failed to prove well‑founded fear for political opinion or membership of a protected group as parent of multiple children.
Refugee law — well‑founded fear: burden of proof, credibility and objective corroboration; Particular social group — parents of more than one child under China's one‑child policy not a protected group where policy is of general application; Refugee Act s3 and international guidance considered.
 Judgment 15 November 2006