Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Two of the defendants, Mr Abulane Alpheus Tshabalala and Mr Annanius Ntuli, sought leave to appeal their convictions and sentences in the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court found jurisdiction in the case because of an existing uncertainty in South African criminal law about the proper application of the common purpose doctrine to ...
In contradistinction to the lower courts, the Constitutional Court declined to entertain arguments about the objective minimum quantity of water that qualified as "sufficient" for the purposes of section 27(1)(b). Instead, the Constitutional Court assessed the constitutionality of the city's policy by submitting it to reasonableness review.
The court granted the applicant direct access, accepting the commission's argument that it was important for the Constitutional Court to make an urgent and final determination on the issue, because an application brought in the High Court could lead to a prolonged process of appeals that might outlast the commission's own mandate. Although ...
The High Court's order was partly upheld. Section 49(2) of the CPA was declared to be inconsistent with the Constitution and was therefore invalidated, though only with prospective effect. However, the Constitutional Court overturned the High Court's finding that section 49(1) was unconstitutional as it applied to suspects in flight.
Bhe and Others v Magistrate, Khayelitsha and Others; Shibi v Sithole and Others; SA Human Rights Commission and Another v President of the RSA and Another [1] was an important case in South African customary law. The case was heard in the Constitutional Court on 2 and 3 March 2004, with judgment handed down on 15 October. Chaskalson CJ, Langa ...
The Constitutional Court acknowledged that it was a "hard and unpalatable fact" that Mr. Soobramoney could receive the treatment if he would have been wealthy. Its 2001 decision in Government v Grootboom , however, held the state to a much more rigorous standard for " reasonableness ," requiring that it give consideration to the needs of the ...
The question of how socio-economic rights were to be enforced, however, was a difficult issue which had to be carefully explored on a case-by-case basis, considering the terms and context of the relevant constitutional provision and its application to the circumstances of the case. [7] The court found that interpreting a right in its context ...
S v Mamabolo is a case in which the Constitutional Court of South Africa dealt with the relationship between contempt of court and freedom of speech.The court held that a person could only be convicted of "scandalising the court" for a statement made outside of the court if that statement "really was likely to damage the administration of justice".