Explore 7 related cases • Click to navigate
Cited to support the requirement of evaluating foreseeability and proximity of harm when considering the imposition of liability on public servants.
Cited to confirm that wrongfulness acts as a brake on liability and that public policy may determine that imposing liability would be undesirable.
Cited to explain the relationship between legal causation and wrongfulness and the application of public policy considerations infused with constitutional…
Cited to confirm that the sine qua non test applies for factual causation.
Applied to interpret the purpose of rule 16A(1) requiring particularity of the constitutional challenge to enable affected persons to protect their interests…
The Court distinguishes Prince (which concerned the right to privacy of adults using cannabis in private) from the present matter, which concerns the…
Applied to confirm that section 28(2) creates a set of rights that courts are obliged to enforce and to interpret best interests of the child as paramount.
Considered for its view that a purported dismissal was administrative action in terms of PAJA.
Applied the well-established test for negligence formulated by Holmes JA, namely whether a reasonable person would have foreseen harm and taken steps to guard…
Cited to confirm that wrongfulness depends on reasonableness of imposing liability and the need to prevent a chilling effect on public servants.
Applied to define the test for negligent omission and to distinguish between the factual causation and legal causation enquiries.
The unreported judgment of this Court from which the facts regarding the appellants' earlier criminal appeal are set out; the evidence and statements in that…
Cited to support the extension of the negligence test to include constitutional obligations on public servants.
Cited to confirm that wrongfulness is an essential element in delict.
Cited to confirm that the Constitutional Court endorsed the test for negligence formulated in Kruger v Coetzee.
Cited for the general purpose of the Protected Disclosures Act to protect employees who make protected disclosures from retribution by their employer.
The court applies the principle that constitutional issues must be clearly and specifically raised in pleadings or affidavits, particularly emphasizing the…
Court cites this case as an example where the Minister applied for an extension one day before the expiry of the suspension order and a limited extension was…
Cited for the requirements of animus injuriandi in malicious prosecution cases, specifically that it requires knowledge of wrongfulness or recklessness.
Cited for the principle that magistrates and prosecutors currently enjoy protection for good faith execution of their functions as judicial officers.
The application for confirmation concerns the order of the High Court declaring section 77(6)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Criminal Procedure Act constitutionally…
Cited for the principle that a rational connection between the restrictions and their purpose must be established.
Cited for the approach to the limitations analysis, including that a challenge based on overbreadth is essentially a challenge based on less restrictive means.
Applied for the principle that compensation must be just and equitable and a number of factors must be taken into account when quantifying the compensation
Earlier aborted proceedings in the Equality Court in which Mr Gumede filed an affidavit attached to the High Court record.
Cited in support of the principle regarding misdirection and proper exercise of discretion in sentencing.
Regarding section 1(1)(b) in the Moyo matter, the majority found the section constitutional when properly interpreted to require mens rea, unlawfulness, and an…
The court applies the four elements or requirements for an action for malicious prosecution set out in this case.
Cited for the doctrine of speciality in extradition proceedings.
Cited in support of the requirement that detention warrants must be validly issued in accordance with proper procedure.
Zealand is followed for the principle that once interference with liberty is established, the onus shifts to the state to justify the detention, and that…
The court cited this case for the principle that the Protected Disclosures Act affirms the democratic values of human dignity, equality and freedom enshrined…
This is the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment from which the applicant now seeks leave to appeal; the appeal was upheld and the order of the SCA set aside.
Applied to restate the requirements for malicious prosecution
The court distinguishes Palazzolo and clarifies that the Act does not oblige the Minister to issue a notice in terms of s 5(1)(a) when the arrest has been…
The Minister applied for an extension of the suspension period as the remedial legislation had not been enacted within the original 12-month period. The…
The Court cites the principle that the state is under a constitutional obligation to pass legislation within specific time frames and that extensions of orders…
Applied for the proposition that breach of a public duty is not necessarily actionable in damages and that unlawful detention is prima facie unlawful and…
Court follows the reasoning in Ntuli regarding the lack of jurisdiction under the Equality Act and applies the same principles to set aside the order under the…
Applied for the interpretation of s 39(3) that it provides for lawful detention only during the period between lawful arrest and the first court appearance.
Cited for the proposition that where unlawful detention is alleged, the State bears the burden to justify the deprivation of liberty.
Lincoln instituted a civil action for damages arising from alleged malicious prosecution against the Minister of Safety and Security (after withdrawing the…
Court considers this case in relation to respondent's submission that there was an omission on the part of the appellant's servant to perform a public duty…
Followed for the principle that interference with physical liberty is prima facie unlawful and the person causing the interference bears the burden of…
Court applies the principle that an unjustifiable breach of s 12(1)(a) of the Constitution is sufficient to establish unlawfulness for purposes of a delictual…
Cited for the proposition that the appellant bears the onus of establishing the lawfulness of the respondent's arrest on a balance of probabilities.
Followed for the Constitutional Court's determination that a court must enquire whether a witness can comprehend what it means to tell the truth before…
Cited for the principle that the burden justifying detention rests on the detaining authority.
Cited for the principle that every interference with physical liberty is prima facie unlawful and the burden falls on the person causing the interference to…
Applied for the proposition that once a claimant establishes interference with physical liberty, the onus shifts to the respondent to justify that…
Mark Thatcher brought an urgent review application challenging decisions requiring him to appear in court to answer questions relating to an alleged coup.
Cited for the proposition that to succeed in a claim for malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must prove four elements including that the defendant acted…
Cited on the concept of intimate personal associations and relationships that are less likely to attract justifiable state interference.
Distinguished and partly disapproved regarding the DPP's duty in issuing a s 7 certificate and the jurisdictional requirements; court held it was incorrectly…
Mentioned as the decision that consolidated the constitutional challenge and equality proceedings.
Cited for the corollary of freedom of expression being tolerance by society of different views.
Applied for the principle that every interference with physical liberty is prima facie unlawful and the burden falls upon the person causing the interference…
Court applies the principle that when questioning a child witness, the purpose is to determine whether the child understands what it means to speak the truth,…
Court applies the requirements for successful claims for malicious prosecution, including that malice is interpreted as animus injuriandi and may be…
Cited to explain the purpose of Uniform rule 16(1) to bring constitutional challenges to the attention of persons who may be affected.
Cited for the principle that if an unusual order varying the default position of constitutional invalidity were intended, one would expect it to be expressed…
This Court's judgment on cannabis is considered in relation to whether the offence for which the applicant is charged in the UK is still an offence in South…
Cited as an example of a case where the PAJA time period was extended by six months.
Court applies Zealand principle that it was sufficient for applicant to plead unlawful detention and the onus is on respondents to justify the deprivation of…
Cited for the finding that absolute inclusion of designated group members to the absolute exclusion of non-designated group members amounts to unfair…
This case (Nyathi 2) is referenced in the context of determining whether the appeal issue had become moot, having crafted certain procedures to ensure that…
Court cites Moleko for the principle that malice requires proof of intent to injure, not merely an error in judgment, and that prosecutors must lack an honest…
Cited for the principle that the Minister bears the onus to justify arrest and initial detention; also that since Zealand, a remand order does not necessarily…
To the extent that Palazzolo holds that the double criminality rule requires conduct to be criminal under South African law at the date of commission of the…
Court cited Mpofu for affirming the principle in Pillay that on appeal against sentence the inquiry is whether the trial court exercised its discretion…
Cited for the principle that courts must consider the effect of their decisions on the rights and interests of the child and that the legal and judicial…