<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.w3.org/2000/08/w3c-synd/style.css" type="text/css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
    <channel>
        <title>Polity.org.za | High Courts</title>
        <description><![CDATA[Polity.org.za offers a unique take on news, with a focus on political, legal, economic and social issues in South Africa and Africa, as well as international affairs. Polity strives to provide our readers reliable and objective reporting on important issues that drive our society.]]></description>
        <link>https://www.polity.org.za/page/high-courts</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 03:59:38 +0200</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
        <item>
            <title>S v Zuma and Another (Leave to Appeal) (CCD30/2018) [2026] ZAKZPHC 54</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/s-v-zuma-and-another-leave-to-appeal-ccd302018-2026-zakzphc-54-2026-05-15</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]      Simultaneously with the applications for leave to appeal against the judgment and order of this court dismissing Mr Zuma’s and Thales South Africa (Pty) Ltd’s applications to quash the charges in accordance with s 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (the CPA), the State, represented by Mr Trengove SC, brought its own application, seeking the court’s intervention in what it termed a Stalingrad tactic that has prevented the commencement of the trial in this matter for decades.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 14:39:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>721420</a_id>
        <updated>1778848855</updated>
        <published>1778848740</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001272252_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Zuma, Mbeki vs Khampepe and others</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/zuma-mbeki-vs-khampepe-and-others-2026-03-30</link>
            <description><![CDATA[The applicants, Mr Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma and Mr Thabo Mvuyelwa Mbeki, have approached this Court on an urgent basis. They seek a range of relief against the first respondent, Commissioner Sisi Khampepe, who, as the President's appointee, serves as the Chairperson of a Commission of Inquiry investigating allegations of political interference in the prosecution of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) cases.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2026 10:49:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>718301</a_id>
        <updated>1774860733</updated>
        <published>1774860540</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001262610_resized_gavelandscalesofjusticelegallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        <attachments><attachment><url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/96390_judgement_-_zuma_and_another_v_khampepe_and_others_[2026-026936].pdf</url><size>1087280</size><title>Zuma, Mbeki vs Khampepe and others</title></attachment></attachments>
        <media:group><media:content url="https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/96390_judgement_-_zuma_and_another_v_khampepe_and_others_[2026-026936].pdf" fileSize="1087280" type="video" medium="video" expression="full"><media:description type="plain">Zuma, Mbeki vs Khampepe and others</media:description></media:content></media:group>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union v Samancor Chrome Limited (Application for ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/association-of-mineworkers-and-construction-union-v-samancor-chrome-limited-application-for-leave-to-appeal-2022046427-2026-zagpjhc-260-2026-03-13</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]  The applicant (AMCU) seeks leave to appeal against the dismissal of its application.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 15:01:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>717269</a_id>
        <updated>1773407277</updated>
        <published>1773406860</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001259604_resized_legalgavellawlawyer1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Democratic Alliance v Minister of Finance and Others (2025/045530) [2026] ZAWCHC 102</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/democratic-alliance-v-minister-of-finance-and-others-2025045530-2026-zawchc-102-2026-03-06</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  Summary: Constitutional Law – Section 7(4) of the VAT Act 89 of 1991– impermissible delegation of legislative power to the Minister – Section 7(4) authorising the executive to determine rate of tax that applies across the economy - delegated power not accompanied by express statutory criteria governing the magnitude of the alteration, nor requiring parliament’s ratification within a defined short period after its exercise - No sufficiently defined statutory limits or mechanisms of prompt legislative control to ensure that the balance between executive agility and parliamentary supremacy is maintained - section 7(4) declared unconstitutional and invalid as it constitutes an impermissible delegation of legislative power to the executive.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2026 14:33:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>716792</a_id>
        <updated>1772800446</updated>
        <published>1772800380</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001258174_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Minister of Basic Education and Others v Mkhonto and Others (A70/2024) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 112</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/minister-of-basic-education-and-others-v-mkhonto-and-others-a702024-2025-zampmbhc-112-2025-11-21</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the judgment on Saflii [1]   Introduction.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2025 14:35:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>710566</a_id>
        <updated>1763728636</updated>
        <published>1763728500</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001240329_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia &#38; Others vs Operation Dudula &#38; others </title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/kopanang-africa-against-xenophobia-others-vs-operation-dudula-others-2025-11-04</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Application for interdictory and declaratory relief against Operation Dudula and against the Government of South Africa – section 41 of the Immigration Act 13 of 2002 – application for declarator that only Immigration Officials and Police Officers have the power to demand identification from persons – Operation Dudula interdicted from demanding that any private person produce identification – application for declarator that SAPS breached its constitutional duties to combat and investigate crime and to uphold and enforce the law refused – Operation Dudula also interdicted from unlawful conduct and conduct which amounts to them taking the law into their own hands and hate speech,]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2025 12:00:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>709203</a_id>
        <updated>1762250642</updated>
        <published>1762250400</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001236326_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        <attachments><attachment><url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/95745_2023-044685_-_kopanang_africa_&_others_v_operation_dudula_&_others_-_2025.11[1].pdf</url><size>476337</size><title>Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia &#38; Others vs Operation Dudula &#38; others </title></attachment></attachments>
        <media:group><media:content url="https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/95745_2023-044685_-_kopanang_africa_&_others_v_operation_dudula_&_others_-_2025.11[1].pdf" fileSize="476337" type="video" medium="video" expression="full"><media:description type="plain">Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia &#38; Others vs Operation Dudula &#38; others </media:description></media:content></media:group>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Presidency of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Zuma and Others (003372/2024) [2025] ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/presidency-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-and-others-v-zuma-and-others-0033722024-2025-zagpphc-1104-2025-10-24</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii The applicants (the State) together with the fourth respondent (the DA), have applied for an order directing the first respondent (Mr. Zuma) to repay all the monies disbursed by the State towards his legal costs incurred and relating to a criminal prosecution and ancillary litigation instituted against him in his personal capacity.]]></description>
            <author>Sashnee Moodley</author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2025 14:46:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>708547</a_id>
        <updated>1761310065</updated>
        <published>1761309960</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001234320_resized_gavelandscalesofjusticelegallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Phuhlani Bafazi Construction (Pty) Ltd t/a Chuma Security Services v Passenger Rail Agency of ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/phuhlani-bafazi-construction-pty-ltd-ta-chuma-security-services-v-passenger-rail-agency-of-south-africa-and-others-2025155065-2025-zawchc-442-2025-10-03</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii Summary: Pactum de non cedendo, subject to the prior written consent of a contracting party – Does not render an assignment between the other contracting party and a third party invalid – operates inter partes.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2025 15:11:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>707001</a_id>
        <updated>1759497160</updated>
        <published>1759497060</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001229892_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>MVC NPC vs President and others </title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/mvc-npc-vs-president-and-others-2025-08-22</link>
            <description><![CDATA[The applicant describes itself as a campaigner for a more inclusive, transparent and accountable political and electoral system in South Africa, which has as its objective increased accountability, transparency and inclusiveness of elections and politics in South Africa. The applicant avers that it strives to achieve its objective by inter alia campaigning for reform of the political party funding system in South Africa through the introduction of legislation and other measures. In 2017 the applicant successfully challenged the constitutionality of the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Act 2 of 2000 ('PAIA&#34;) to the extent that it failed to provide for access to information on the private funding of political parties. This failure rendered PAIA inconsistent with the constitutional right to access information, the state's obligation to protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights, the citizen's political rights.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2025 14:22:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>704195</a_id>
        <updated>1755867243</updated>
        <published>1755865320</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001221249_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        <attachments><attachment><url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/95392_skm_c300i25082112440.pdf</url><size>712503</size><title>MVC NPC vs President and others </title></attachment></attachments>
        <media:group><media:content url="https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/attachments/95392_skm_c300i25082112440.pdf" fileSize="712503" type="video" medium="video" expression="full"><media:description type="plain">MVC NPC vs President and others </media:description></media:content></media:group>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kunene and Another v Malema (A2023/092235) [2025] ZAGPJHC 742 </title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/kunene-and-another-v-malema-a2023092235-2025-zagpjhc-742-2025-08-08</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  Section 10 of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 – the nature of hate speech – whether hate speech can be committed by addressing hateful words to a political opponent – the purpose of section 10 explained and discussed – the genocidal connotations of the word “cockroach” – the hateful nature of its use in political debate.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2025 14:33:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>703187</a_id>
        <updated>1754656502</updated>
        <published>1754656380</published>
        <expires>99999999999</expires>
        <editor>Creamer Media Reporter  </editor>
        <has_video>0</has_video>
        <has_audio>0</has_audio>
        <image_url>https://cisp.cachefly.net/assets/articles/images/resized/0001218258_resized_legalgavellawlawyer1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
