Lourens v Premier of the Free State Province and Another

The appellant sought to have the Premier of the Free State held in contempt of a High Court order issued in November 2013. That order, granted by agreement, required the Premier, within his authority and powers, to put in place legislative and other measures to regulate and monitor the use of official languages in the Free State Province by 31 March 2014, in compliance with s 6(4) of the Constitution read with item 21(1) of Schedule 6. Following the order, the Premier instructed the responsible MEC to finalise a language policy and language bill. The executive council approved both, the bill was published in the Provincial Gazette, and it was tabled before the provincial legislature. The bill later lapsed due to the 2014 general elections but was reintroduced and ultimately enacted in 2017. Despite these steps, the appellant alleged that the Premier deliberately failed to comply with the court order and applied for his committal for contempt. The High Court dismissed the contempt application, finding no wilful or mala fide non-compliance, and the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

The case reaffirms the strict requirements for establishing civil contempt of court, particularly the need to prove wilful and mala fide non-compliance beyond reasonable doubt. It clarifies the constitutional separation of powers at provincial level, confirming that a Premier cannot be held responsible for delays within the legislative process. The judgment also illustrates limits on the Biowatch costs principle where constitutional litigation is unreasonable or inappropriate.