<?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>Sat, 19 Sep 2026 13:44:50 +0200</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
        <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>
        <item>
            <title>Umkhonto Wesizwe Party and Another v Ramaphosa and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2026. ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/umkhonto-wesizwe-party-and-another-v-ramaphosa-and-others-leave-to-appeal-2026138228-2026-zawchc-454-2026-08-28</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii Summary: Application for leave to appeal against an interim interdict restraining public hearings in a s 89 impeachment enquiry — s 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 — the conditions in paras (a), (b) and (c) are cumulative — appealability governed by the interests of justice and going to the jurisdiction of the court of appeal, which a grant of leave below does not bind — meaning of “falls within the ambit of section 16(2)(a)” in s 17(1)(b) — the description of the class of case is directed to the court of first instance, the discretion to hear a moot appeal is reserved to the court of appeal — same result on the alternative construction — order lapsing before any appeal can be heard — stare decisis and earlier full bench decisions of the same Division sitting at first instance — leave refused notwithstanding that two of the grounds raise unsettled questions of law.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2026 15:25:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>729003</a_id>
        <updated>1787923605</updated>
        <published>1787923500</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/0001295753_resized_legallawjudiciarycourt1022scales.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ramaphosa v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (2026/138228) [2026] ZAWCHC 371</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/ramaphosa-v-speaker-of-the-national-assembly-and-others-2026138228-2026-zawchc-371-2026-07-24</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  Issue – Requirements for interim relief – The applicant – the President of the Republic of South Africa seeks interim relief to restrain the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairperson of the Impeachment Committee from proceeding with an impeachment enquiry in terms of Rule 129M of the Rules of the National Assembly – Minority concludes President failed to make out a case for interim relief. Majority concludes differently and grants interdict of limited duration.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 14:39:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>726448</a_id>
        <updated>1784896826</updated>
        <published>1784896740</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/0001287867_resized_cyrilramaphosa090420261022.jpeg</image_url>
        <image_title>President Cyril Ramaphosa</image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>South African Human Rights Commission and Another v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/south-african-human-rights-commission-and-another-v-city-of-ekurhuleni-metropolitan-municipality-and-others-2026-124157-2026-zagpjhc-765-2026-07-17</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  1                    On 13 July 2026, I dismissed an application for leave to appeal brought in this matter by the first to third respondents (to whom I shall refer collectively as “the municipality”). I indicated at the time I refused leave for appeal that I would make my reasons for doing so known in due course. These are my reasons.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>High Courts</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2026 15:18:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>725938</a_id>
        <updated>1784294386</updated>
        <published>1784294280</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/0001286243_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Adonisi and Others v Minister for Transport and Public Works, Western Cape and Others; Minister ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/adonisi-and-others-v-minister-for-transport-and-public-works-western-cape-and-others-minister-of-human-settlements-and-another-v-minister-for-transport-and-public-works-western-cape-and-others-cct-12624-cct-12824-2026-zacc-29-2026-07-03</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  FLYNOTES: CONSTITUTION – Housing – Equitable access to land – Applicants opposed disposal of well located Tafelberg property for private development, contending it should be used for social housing – Province and City argued compliance with statutory framework and broader housing programmes – Court held location integral to “adequate housing” under section 26, disposal perpetuated spatial injustice, and public participation defective – Regulations inconsistent with Constitution, cooperative governance duties breached – Appeals upheld, invalidity declared, Province liable for costs – Constitution, s 26.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2026 15:11:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>724995</a_id>
        <updated>1783084378</updated>
        <published>1783084260</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/0001283289_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary1022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ex parte President of the Republic of South Africa: In re Constitutionality of the Copyright ...</title>
            <link>https://www.polity.org.za/article/ex-parte-president-of-the-republic-of-south-africa-in-re-constitutionality-of-the-copyright-amendment-bill-and-the-performers-protection-amendment-bill-cct-30624-2026-zacc-26-2026-06-26</link>
            <description><![CDATA[Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii  [1]            On 10 October 2024, the President of the Republic of South Africa launched an application on an ex parte (without notice to other parties) basis in terms of sections 79(4)[1] and 84(2)(c)[2] of the Constitution.  The application concerns proposed amendments to the Copyright Act[3] (Act) and the Performers’ Protection Act,[4] and in particular, whether certain sections in the Copyright Amendment Bill (CAB) and the Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill (PPAB) are constitutional.]]></description>
            <author>Creamer Media Reporter  </author>
            <category>Constitutional Court</category>
            <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 15:31:00 +0200</pubDate>
        <a_id>724476</a_id>
        <updated>1782480788</updated>
        <published>1782480660</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/0001281641_resized_legallawgaveljudiciary221022.jpg</image_url>
        <image_title></image_title>
        <image_width>511</image_width>
        <image_height>287</image_height>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
