<?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 | All Case Law</title>
        <description><![CDATA[Polity offers free access to South African case law. Find legal judgments made in the High Court, Constitutional Court, Magistrates Courts and Supreme Court of Appeal.]]></description>
        <link>https://www.polity.org.za/page/all-case-law</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2026 21:56:38 +0200</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
        <item>
            <title>National Director of Public Prosecutions v Agrizzi (077715/2024) [2026] ZAGPPHC 1243</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/national-director-of-public-prosecutions-v-agrizzi-0777152024-2026-zagpphc-1243-2026-10-30</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]      This is an application for a confiscation enquiry with the view to making a confiscation order against the defendant in terms of section 18 of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 ("POCA"), brought by the National Director of Public Prosecutions ("State") as the applicant.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2026 14:31:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>733364</a_id>
        <updated>1793363577</updated>
        <published>1793363460</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/0001309516_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary221022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mofokeng and Another v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others (CCT 246/25) [2026] ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/mofokeng-and-another-v-president-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-and-others-cct-24625-2026-zacc-43-2026-10-23</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  Joint pardon application remained undecided for 24 years – Presidential pardon power coupled with duty to decide applications diligently – Departmental processing failures remained attributable to Presidency – Later pardons did not render constitutional breach or remedies moot – Delay constituted failure to fulfil constitutional obligations – Constitutional damages most effective remedy for egregious prolonged breach – Structural interdict unnecessary despite clear systemic failures – Quantum reserved for written submissions on constitutional damages – Applicants awarded costs including two counsel – Constitution, s 84(2)(j).]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2026 14:49:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>732902</a_id>
        <updated>1792759860</updated>
        <published>1792759740</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/0001308000_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Eskom SOC Limited v City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality and Another (2023-072548) [2026] ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/eskom-soc-limited-v-city-of-tshwane-metropolitan-municipality-and-another-2023-072548-2026-zagpphc-1111-2026-10-09</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]             This is an application for leave to appeal against a judgment and order handed down on 8 June 2026.[1] The present application is brought by Eskom who was the second respondent in the main case. Nersa, the first respondent in the main case and whose decision was the subject of the review application initially also delivered a notice of application for leave to appeal but abandoned this course of action before the hearing of this application.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 15:16:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>731947</a_id>
        <updated>1791551903</updated>
        <published>1791551760</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/0001304871_resized_gavelandscalesofjusticelegallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ethekwini Metropolitan Municipality v Democratic Alliance and Others (3036/2023P) [2026] ZAKZPHC 97</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/ethekwini-metropolitan-municipality-v-democratic-alliance-and-others-30362023p-2026-zakzphc-97-2026-10-02</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]  The applicant, eThekwini Municipality, which served as the first respondent in the main application, is seeking leave to appeal the whole judgment and order issued by the full court sitting as a court of first instance on 18 December 2025.[1] Leave is sought to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal on the grounds of both reasonable prospects of success and compelling reasons.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2026 14:46:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>731460</a_id>
        <updated>1790945256</updated>
        <published>1790945160</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/0001303479_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kubukeli and Another v uMkhonto weSizwe Party and Others (217118/26) [2026] ZAWCHC 557</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/kubukeli-and-another-v-umkhonto-wesizwe-party-and-others-21711826-2026-zawchc-557-2026-09-25</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  (a)  The Presidential Decrees, as reported by the Secretary General of uMkhonto weSizwe Party on 27 August 2021, issued by the Honourable President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma, expelling and terminating the membership of the two applicants, Mr Pumlani Kubukeli and Dr Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala, from uMkhonto weSizwe Party, are reviewed and set aside, and the status quo ante is preserved in that Mr Pumlani Kubukeli and Dr Khanyisile Litchfield-Tshabalala automatically, following the review and set aside, become members of MKP.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 14:59:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>731002</a_id>
        <updated>1790341239</updated>
        <published>1790341140</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/0001302031_resized_gavel2legallaw1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Premier of the Western Cape Government and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly and ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/premier-of-the-western-cape-government-and-another-v-speaker-of-the-national-assembly-and-others-city-of-cape-town-and-others-v-speaker-of-the-national-assembly-and-others-cct-10325-cct-14425-2026-zacc-37-2026-09-18</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]       These are two applications brought in terms of section 167(4)(e) of the Constitution for orders declaring that the National Assembly (NA), the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) (collectively referred to as Parliament) and the nine Provincial Legislatures failed to fulfil their constitutional obligations to reasonably facilitate public involvement in the passing of the Public Procurement Act[1] (Act).]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:12:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>730539</a_id>
        <updated>1789737249</updated>
        <published>1789737120</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/0001300748_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary221022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>National Freedom Party v Shinga and Others (2026-126328) [2026] ZAKZPHC 91</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/national-freedom-party-v-shinga-and-others-2026-126328-2026-zakzphc-91-2026-09-18</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  1.    That this application be heard as one of urgency in terms of Rule 6(12) of the Uniform Rules of Court, and that condonation be and is hereby granted for the applicant’s non-compliance with the forms, time limits and service for in the Rules.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 15:11:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>730538</a_id>
        <updated>1789737160</updated>
        <published>1789737060</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/0001300742_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Democratic Alliance v Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality and Another (2026-027289) [2026] ZAFSHC 419</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/democratic-alliance-v-mangaung-metropolitan-municipality-and-another-2026-027289-2026-zafshc-419-2026-09-11</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  Matshelo AJ]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 14:31:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>729994</a_id>
        <updated>1789129984</updated>
        <published>1789129860</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/0001298895_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Zuma and Another v Chairperson of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations Regarding ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/zuma-and-another-v-chairperson-of-the-judicial-commission-of-inquiry-into-allegations-regarding-efforts-or-attempts-having-been-made-to-stop-the-investigation-or-prosecution-of-truth-and-reconciliation-commission-cases-and-others-cct-9026-2026-zacc-34-202</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii “The Commission operates at the intersection of profoundly significant and competing interests: the Calata Group and other victims seeking long-delayed truth and accountability; former Presidents whose personal and reputational interests are engaged; and the foundational constitutional values of national unity, reconciliation, and the rule of law that underpinned the [Truth and Reconciliation Commission]’s restorative justice framework.  Maintaining public confidence in such a process requires scrupulous institutional impartiality.  Any reasonable perception that the Chairperson’s continued involvement may compromise that impartiality risks undermining the Commission’s credibility and rendering its work vulnerable to lasting doubt.”]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2026 11:51:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>729203</a_id>
        <updated>1788256363</updated>
        <published>1788256260</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/0001296256_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary221022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Govender v Director of Public Prosecutions Kwazulu-Natal (2026/133822) [2026] ZAKZDHC 52</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/govender-v-director-of-public-prosecutions-kwazulu-natal-2026133822-2026-zakzdhc-52-2026-09-01</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii [1]            This is an opposed application which served before me, initially as an urgent application on 10 June 2026 in motion court. The original relief foreshadowed in the notice of motion was the following:]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2026 11:49:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>729202</a_id>
        <updated>1788256242</updated>
        <published>1788256140</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/0001296253_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
