Coughlan NO v The Road Accident Fund

Case No. Lower Court Judgments Hearing Date
CCT 160/14 Western Cape Division, 6 Jun. 2013
SCA, 3 Sep. 2014
12 Feb. 2015

By Duncan Wild on 15 November 2014

This matter concerns whether foster child grants made to the foster parent of children whose mother was killed by the driver of a motor car, and for which the Road Accident Fund (“RAF“) admitted liability, are deductible from damages awarded for loss of support to the children.

Continue reading

My Vote Counts NPC v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others

Case No. Lower Court Judgments Hearing Date
CCT 121/14 Application for Direct Access 10 Feb. 2015

By Duncan Wild on 15 November 2014

This matter involves an application for an order by the Constitutional Court that Parliament is obliged to pass legislation that would require the disclosure of the sources and amounts of money donated privately to political parties (“funding legislation“), and that in not passing such legislation, Parliament has failed in its duty.  The applicant further argues that making such an order falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, requiring direct access to the Court.   Continue reading

Bapedi Marota Mamone v The Commission of Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims and Others

Case No. Lower Court Judgments Hearing Date
CCT 67/14 Gauteng Division, Pretoria 21 Sep. 2012
SCA, 28 Mar. 2014
26 Aug. 2014

By Michael Mbikiwa on 25 August 2014

This application is about the determination of the king of the Pedi nation.  The applicant, a traditional authority recognised under the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003 (‘the Framework Act’), seeks to review and set aside a determination made by the Commission for Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims (commonly known as ‘the Nhlapo Commission’) that the kingship of the Pedi nation resorts in Acting Kgošikgolo Sekhukhune III – and not in Kgoši Mampuru Mampuru III, the applicant’s leader. Continue reading

Stratford and Others v Investec Bank Limited and Others

Case No. Lower Court Judgments Hearing Date
CCT 62/14 Western Cape Division, Cape Town, 14 Aug. 2013 2 Sep. 2014

By Duncan Wild on 13 August 2014

The case concerns a challenge to an order declaring the first and second appellants (Mr and Mrs Stratford) insolvent, as well as a challenge to the provisions of section 9(4A)(a)(ii) of the Insolvency Act. This section prescribes the manner in which an employee of the debtor is to receive notice of an application for the sequestration of the debtor’s estate. As the law currently stands, this section has been interpreted by the Supreme Court of Appeal to apply only to notice to a debtor’s business employees, however, the appellants claim that it must be interpreted to apply also to a debtor’s domestic employees.  Continue reading

The Minister of Defence and Military Veterans v Maomela Moreti Motau & Others

 Case No.  Lower Court Judgments  Hearing Date
 CCT 133/13 Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria 17 Feb. 2014

By Nurina Ally on 1 February 2014

The Constitutional Court has previously commented that the characterisation of a particular decision as being of an administrative nature is “something of a puzzle”.  In Motau, the Court is being asked to decipher one dimension of that puzzle.

The case concerns the scope of judicial review and raises the question of when conduct by an executive functionary should be characterised as administrative action. Continue reading

South African Informal Traders Forum and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others

 Case No.  Lower Court Judgments  Hearing Date
 CCT 173/13  South Gauteng High Court, 27 November 2013 5 December 2013

By Duncan Wild on 4 December 2013

The first applicant, South African Informal Traders Forum (“SAITF“), is an association of informal traders, the second to one thousand two hundred and twelfth applicants (“the Traders“) until recently were informal traders doing business in the inner city of Johannesburg. During October 2013, all of the Traders were removed from their trading locations and their goods impounded, preventing them from trading. The first respondent, the City of Johannesburg (“the City“) states this was necessary to determine which of the Traders were operating unlawfully.

On 19 November 2013, SAITF and the Traders launched an application in the Gauteng Local Division of the High Court of South Africa in Johannesburg (“Johannesburg High Court“), on an urgent basis, seeking first that the Traders be allowed to trade in the City, pending the resolution of second part of the application, which is a review of the lawfulness City’s actions in removing the Traders. The Johannesburg High Court found that the application was not urgent and so struck it from the roll. This would allow SAITF and the Traders to continue with the review application in the ordinary course, which could take several months to resolve. As the Traders would not be permitted to Trade during this period, this would, they say, cause them great prejudice as they would have no means to earn a living for at least several months.

SAITF and the Traders therefore approached the Constitutional Court seeking leave to appeal against the decision of the Johannesburg High Court, and either allowing the Traders to trade pending the outcome of the appeal in the Constitutional Court, or allowing them to trade pending the determination of the review application by the Johannesburg High Court.