Landmark Judgments of South Africa

Landmark Judgments

Access the landmark judgments of South Africa immediately. On the page below are the judgments that we believe break new ground or contribute significantly to the development of the understanding and appreciation of the law. These are the landmark judgments in the topics that we monitor and are listed in chronological order. We use our years of knowledge and experience to pick out those judgments that we believe are landmark judgments. Every interested person should have at least read our understanding of these landmark judgments.

Subscribe to GilesFiles for quick, easy access to the very latest court judgments on specific topics. You may cancel at any time.

Formidable appeal threshold: Would not might

by GilesFiles | Jul 29, 2020 | 2020, 2020, appeal, Appeals, Applications, Courts, Dunstan Mlambo, Government - central, High Court, High Court judges, Judges, Jurisdiction and powers, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Orders, Parties, Refused, Sectors, Topics | 0 Comments

Democratic Alliance v President of RSA Full bench of the High Court considered the formidable appeal threshold which now exists in sec 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 and that before concluding that there are prospects of success of appeal there must be...

Language policy unconstitutional: Resolution set aside

by GilesFiles | Jun 30, 2020 | 2020, 2020, Appeals, Associations, Bill of Rights, Courts, Dignity equality freedom, Judges, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Legislation, MML Maya, Parties, SCA judges, Sectors, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics, Universities and schools | 0 Comments

AfriForum NPC v Chairperson: Council: University of South Africa The SCA upheld the appeal with costs and declared that the new language policy adopted by Unisa is unconstitutional and set aside the resolution because Unisa failed to prove that the adoption of the new...

Aggravated psychological damages: Proper police search?

by GilesFiles | May 6, 2020 | 2020, 2020, appeal, Appeals, Cause: delict, Cause: general, Common Law, Courts, Declaratory, DH Zondi, Government - central, Granted, Judges, Jurisdiction and powers, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Orders, Orders re costs, Organs of state, Parties, SCA judges, Sectors, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics | 0 Comments

For subscribers only Whilst some judgment summaries are available to all, this judgment summary is reserved for subscribers only. If you are already a subscriber, you can login to see this judgment summary. If you cannot login, email us and we’ll arrange to give you...

Arbitrators’ notes privileged: Disclosure not required

by GilesFiles | Feb 11, 2020 | 2020, 2020, Applications, Bill of Rights, Cause: Bill of Rights, Cause: statute, Common Law, Courts, Declaratory, DN Unterhalter, Evidence and onus, High Court, High Court judges, Interpretation and application, Judges, Jurisdiction and powers, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Legal practitioners, Legality principle, Legislation, LRA Chpt: 7: s112-184 Dispute resolution, Orders, Parties, Private enterprises, Review tests, Rules and practice manuals, Sectors, Topics, Uniform High Court | 0 Comments

Zamani Marketing and Management Consultants (Pty) Ltd v HCI Invest 15 Holdco (Pty) Ltd Arbitrators notes 'privileged' and high court decided that ". . . , as a general matter, the arbitrators’ notes are too remotely connected to the award and the systemic harm to the...

Majoritarianism principle examined: Operational requirements

by GilesFiles | Jan 23, 2020 | 2020, 2020, Appeals, Bill of Rights, Collective Bargaining (LRL 5), Competition, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Courts, Dispute Resolution (LRL 3), Edwin Cameron, JC Froneman, Judges, Labour Relations, Labour Relations Act 1995, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, LRA Chpt: 3: s11-63 Collective Bargaining, LRA Chpt: 7: s112-184 Dispute resolution, LRA Chpt: 8a: s185-197B Dismissals, Operational requirements-s189, Parties, Procedural issues, Retired judges, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2) - work law, Termination & dismissal (LRL 8), Topics, Trade unions | 0 Comments

Emotional shock principles: Amicus curiae application

by GilesFiles | Dec 18, 2019 | 2019, 2019, amicus curiae, appeal, Appeals, Bill of Rights, Common Law, Courts, Dignity equality freedom, Granted, Judges, Jurisdiction and powers, Landmark judgments, LE Leach, Legal Practice, Orders, philosophy / economics, SCA judges, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics | 0 Comments

R K v Minister of Basic Education Emotional shock principles considered in great detail by the SCA and stressed the importance of a detectable psychiatric injury as being the foundation for such claims. "It is clear from this that our law is closely aligned to that...

Legal advice privilege: Disclosure and waiver

by GilesFiles | Dec 13, 2019 | 2019, 2019, Appeals, Common Law, Courts, Evidence and onus, Interpretation and application, Judges, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, MJD Wallis, SCA judges, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics | 0 Comments

Contango Trading SA v Central Energy Fund SOC Ltd Legal advice privilege considered and to the extent there was conduct that could objectively speaking be viewed as inconsistent with preserving in full the confidentiality of the opinions it had to be seen in the light...

Hate speech examined: Pepuda and constitutionality

by GilesFiles | Nov 29, 2019 | 2019, 2019, Appeals, Bill of Rights, Courts, Dignity equality freedom, Judges, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, MS Navsa, Organs of state, Parties, philosophy / economics, SCA judges, Sectors, Supreme Court of Appeal, Topics | 0 Comments

Res judicata examined: Issue estoppel included

by GilesFiles | Oct 24, 2019 | 2019, 2019, Agriculture, Appeals, Common Law, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Courts, Edwin Cameron, Exceptions/special pleas, issue estoppel, Judges, Jurisdiction and powers, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Legislation, Res judicata, Sectors, SV Khampepe, Topics | 0 Comments

Ascendis Animal Health (Pty) Ltd v Merck Sharpe Dohme Corporation Res judicata examined and Constitutional Court failed to achieve a majority decision which meant that the judgment of the high court was not overturned. "Just or unjust? In my respectful view...

Indigenous minority languages: Froneman J’s concurrence

by GilesFiles | Oct 10, 2019 | 2019, 2019, Bill of Rights, Biowatch principle, ConCourt judges, Constitutional Court, Courts, Edwin Cameron, Insights, JC Froneman, Judges, Labour Relations, Landmark judgments, Legal Practice, Management, Orders re costs, Parties, Policies - strategies - tactics, Retired judges, Sectors, Statutes (LRL 2) - work law, Topics, Universities and schools | 0 Comments

Gelyke Kanse v University of Stellenbosch Indigenous minority languages considered by the Constitutional Court and decided that it was "impossible to set aside or override its conclusion that it was not reasonably practicable to introduce full parallel medium...