Tag: Constitutional Court

Jean-Paul Rudd | Partner | Adams and Adams | mail me | An appeal serving before a full bench in the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria...

Written constitutions are meant to limit government scope and power. Bills of rights are meant to safeguard individual freedom from government overreach. This is as true in South Africa as it is anywhere else. Does the South African Constitution have a provision that allows government to ‘weasel’ its way out of strictly recognising and protecting our rights, or have we misconstrued section 36 entirely?

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, in its supremacy status, requires all three arms of the State, (i.e., the legislature, the executive and the judiciary) to adhere to, and uphold all its principles. There is a need to discuss the principle of separation of powers as enshrined in the constitution, with regards to Regulation 7 to Road Accident Fund Act 56 of 1996, as amended.

The recent Constitutional Court ruling in Arena Holdings (Pty) Ltd t/a Financial Mail and Others v South African Revenue Service puts pressure on President Cyril Ramaphosa to reveal the tax records of the Tshivhase Trust, owner of Phala Phala.

On 28 June 2023, the High Court handed down a landmark judgment where the decision by the Minister of the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) not to extend the longstanding Zimbabwean Exemption Permit (ZEP) after 31 December 2021 was found to be invalid, unlawful, and unconstitutional.

The Employment Equity Amendment Act has been signed into law, which paves the way for setting enforceable numerical targets for employment equity for economic sectors and fining employers who are non-compliant

The Certificate of Need (CON) provisions in the National Health Act 2003 will require doctors to apply for CONs for everything they do and plan to do, including opening a practice and medical equipment they want to use.

On 18 April 2023, the Constitutional Court handed down judgment in National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) v Trenstar (Pty) Ltd (Trenstar). It had to consider the interpretation of section 76(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA), which prohibits employers from using replacement labour during a lock-out unless the lock-out is in response to a strike.

After years of sustained pressure especially from organisations like Sakeliga, the government relented in November last year and promulgated regulations stating that state-owned enterprises (SOEs) no longer have to comply with Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE), requirements when awarding government contracts.

In June 2022, the Pretoria High Court declared the certificate-of-need (CON) provisions in the 2003 National Health Act to be invalid. Although this matter has received little attention in the press, the implications are far reaching for government’s proposed health reforms.