Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
On the other hand, rights also had to be understood in their social and historical context. The right to access to adequate housing could not, therefore, be seen in isolation; it had to be interpreted in the light of its close relationship with the other socio-economic rights, all read together in the setting of the Constitution as a whole. [8] [9]
Irene Grootboom (c. 1969 – 2008) was a South African housing rights activist best known for her victory before the Constitutional Court in 2000. [1] The Court found that the government had not met its obligation to provide adequate alternative housing for the residents of Kraaifontein ’s Wallacedene informal settlement .
Residents of Joe Slovo Community, Western Cape v Thubelisha Homes and Others (Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions and Another, Amici Curiae) [1] is an important case in South African property law, heard by the Constitutional Court [2] on August 21, 2008, with judgment handed down on June 10.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The Grootboom reasonableness test was applied by the Constitutional Court in the Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign case (2002). The claimant argued that the Ministry of Health infringed section 27(3) Constitution of South Africa by failing to distribute the free medicine nevirapine that could prevent mother-to-child transmission of ...
KGW8 reported that the couple posted their reviews and also filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau because they hadn't received a report on the expected timeline of the work.
The body cavity search Christina Cardenas was subjected to at a correctional facility and hospital in Tehachapi amounted to "state sanctioned torture," famed attorney Gloria Allred said.
A lawsuit was filed on June 14, 2007, nine days after Avvo's launch, by Seattle attorneys, John Henry Browne and Alan Wenokur. The suit alleged that Avvo's rating system made false claims of being factual and was therefore deceptive and libelous and violated the Washington Consumer Protection Act.