|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| July 2025 |
|
|
|
29 July 2025 |
|
Direct access refused where Supreme Court lawfully set aside an arbitral award contrary to contract and public policy.
Constitutional procedure — Direct access — Constitutional review of final Supreme Court judgments — Arbitral awards — Public policy under Model Law — Sanctity of contract; exclusion of consequential damages — Finality of Supreme Court decisions — Rights to equal protection (s56) and fair hearing (s69).
|
24 July 2025 |
|
Direct access granted where Supreme Court decision validated trial irregularities that prima facie compromised fair trial rights.
Constitutional law — Direct access — Reviewability of Supreme Court decisions in non-constitutional matters — Interlocutory appeals and binding effect — Right to fair trial (s 69(2)) — Equal protection (s 56(1)) — Assessment of general damages without quantum evidence.
|
21 July 2025 |
|
Direct access refused where Supreme Court lawfully exercised discretion and no constitutional rights were shown to be violated.
Constitutional law – Direct access to Constitutional Court – r 21 interests of justice test – Supreme Court’s exercise of discretion – failure to determine issues – right to equal protection (s56) and fair hearing (s69) – availability of alternative remedies – tax assessments and specialised tax appeal courts.
|
8 July 2025 |
| May 2025 |
|
|
Direct access denied; applicant’s challenge to Supreme Court judgment raised factual, not constitutional, issues and lacked prospects of success.
Constitutional procedure — Direct access under s 167(5) and r 21(2) — Challenge to a Supreme Court judgment under s 85(1) — Finality of Supreme Court decisions — Requirement to plead a constitutional violation with precision — Fair trial (s 69(1)) and equal protection (s 56(1)) — Liability of co-perpetrators: s 196 and s 196A — Pleading and relief: distinction between s 85 and s 175 remedies.
|
27 May 2025 |
|
Court set aside Supreme Court judgment and remitted the matter due to unresolved Rule 29 rescission and jurisdictional uncertainty.
Constitutional jurisdiction; rescission of judgment mero motu (Rule 29) – requirement of formal conclusion and communication; validity and finality of appellate judgments; remittal under s19 of the Constitutional Court Act.
|
15 May 2025 |
|
Direct access refused where applicant’s complaints were factual or unraised, and no constitutional rights were breached.
Constitutional Court — direct access (s 167(5), Rule 21) — interests of justice; appellate deference to trial factual findings; presumption of innocence; assessment of forensic/ballistic evidence not ordinarily a constitutional issue; Practice Direction 3 of 2013 — defective grounds of appeal; sentencing — s 70(1)(n) benefit of lesser penalty where law changes.
|
6 May 2025 |
| March 2025 |
|
|
|
26 March 2025 |