NGCOBO J
[26] Against this background, I now turn to consider the questions presented in these
cases. In view of the number of issues that must be considered in these cases, it will
be convenient to set out the reasoning of the High Court and the contentions of the
parties under each issue. For now, it will suffice to set out the questions.
[27] Before doing so, let me dispose of the issue of condonation.
Condonation
[28] The judgment of the High Court was delivered on 12 May 2008. The Minister
lodged a notice of appeal against the orders of invalidity in this Court on 10 June
2008. In terms of Rule 16(2), the notice of appeal should have been lodged on 2 June
2008. It was therefore late by eight days. No condonation was sought for this
lateness. On 29 July 2008, the Minister lodged an application for leave to appeal
against the declaratory and supervisory orders. This application was also late as it
should have been lodged on 2 June 2008. There is an application for an order
condoning this non-compliance with the rules. The explanation for the delay is utterly
unsatisfactory. It boils down to a failure to read the rules of this Court carefully. This
is unacceptable.
[29] In the view I take of the merits, the application for condonation should
nevertheless be granted despite the unsatisfactory explanation for the delay. If the
orders of invalidity are not confirmed, it would be odd to leave the declaratory and
supervisory orders in place. Similarly, despite the absence of an application for
15
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents