Case Law

The applicants have shown that they have a clear right to the relief they ultimately seek in the main application, a well-grounded apprehension of harm and no other satisfactory remedy. The respondents seek to have the Immigration Act trump the Refugees Act. This is contrary to the injunction in the Ruta case that the two statutes can and should be read in harmony. The applicants are thus entitled to the interim relief they seek, i.e. that they be issued with section 22 permits.

2 September 2019 | Judicial Body: South Africa: High Court | Topic(s): Refugees sur place - Rejected asylum-seekers | Countries: Burundi - South Africa

At issue are the reach of the Refugees Act and of the Immigration Act as well as the interplay between these two statutes; the effect of delay on entitlement to apply for refugee status; the operation of the exclusionary provisions of the Refugees Act, particularly section 4(1)(b); and whether this section applies only to crimes committed outside South Africa. Also at issue is the fidelity of the Supreme Court of Appeal to its own judgments and whether in this case commitment to precedent (stare decisis) was breached.

20 December 2018 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Constitutional Court | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Illegal immigrants / Undocumented migrants - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Serious non-political crime | Countries: Rwanda - South Africa

Citizenship Amendment Act 17 of 2010 - interpretation of s4(3) of the Act - section does not have a retrospective effect - respondents satisfy the requirements of citizenship by naturalisation - failure of the Minister to promulgate regulations for applications for citizenship in terms of s 23 of the Act - the order of the high court directing the Minister to accept applications on affidavits does not encroach upon the doctrine of separation of powers

30 November 2018 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal | Topic(s): Citizenship / Nationality law - Naturalization - Statelessness | Countries: South Africa

Immigration Directive 21 of 2015 — validity of directive — imposes blanket ban on asylum seekers applying for visas under Immigration Act 13 of 2002 — inconsistent with Immigration Act — invalid

9 October 2018 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Constitutional Court | Topic(s): Residence permits / Residency - Visas | Countries: South Africa

This matter engages the jurisdiction of this Court as it involves a constitutional challenge to section 4(1)(b) of the Act. Beyond this, it raises arguable points of law of general public importance, such as the definition of a political crime, the proper interpretation and application of the “exclusion clause”, whether an internal appeal process is available to an excluded person under the Act, as well as what the rights are of an excluded person who may be persecuted upon returning to her country of origin. These are issues of great importance to asylum seekers and refugees, and impact their right to fair administrative action.

28 September 2018 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Constitutional Court | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Extradition - Serious non-political crime | Countries: Serbia - South Africa

7 September 2017 | Judicial Body: South Africa: High Court | Topic(s): Citizenship / Nationality law | Countries: South Africa

29 June 2017 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Constitutional Court | Topic(s): Illegal immigrants / Undocumented migrants - Immigration Detention - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: South Africa

30 March 2017 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal | Topic(s): Residence permits / Residency | Countries: South Africa

28 February 2017 | Judicial Body: South Africa: High Court | Topic(s): Refugee / Asylum law | Countries: South Africa