LexiSA Case Watch
Real SA judgments, explained twice
Every post here is a real, newsworthy South African judgment — never a hypothetical. Each one is broken down twice: the legal principle for lawyers and law students, and the plain-language takeaway for anyone affected by it. Sourced from SAFLII and South African news reporting, with a source link on every post so you can verify it yourself.
A president just persuaded a court to press pause on his own impeachment hearing
Ramaphosa v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others — Western Cape Division, High Court (full bench)
President Cyril Ramaphosa asked the court to stop Parliament's impeachment committee from holding public hearings under National Assembly Rule 129M until his separate review of the section 89 independent panel report — the panel chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, which found he had a case to answer over roughly US$580,000 stolen from his Phala Phala farm in February 2020 — has been decided. A full bench of Judges André le Grange, Matthew Francis and Diane Davis split 2-1. The majority, written by Francis J, held that Ramaphosa had made out a case for interim relief and interdicted Speaker Thoko Didiza and committee chairperson Makashule Gana from proceeding with public hearings pending the review, which is set down for 2 to 4 September 2026. Costs were deferred.
Read the full analysis →
Blind SA's second copyright win: courts can rewrite a law when Parliament stalls
Blind SA v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others — Constitutional Court
In Blind SA I (2022), the Copyright Act was found unconstitutional for failing to let accessible-format copies (Braille, audio, large print) be made for disabled people. This follow-up judgment addressed the remedy while Parliament's Copyright Amendment Bill remains unpassed, reading a new s19D into the Act.
Read the full analysis →
A prisoner studying IT overturned an 18-year-old nationwide computer ban
Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others v Ntuli — Constitutional Court
Mbalenhle Ntuli, an inmate studying computer science, was blocked by a 2007 departmental policy from keeping a personal computer in his cell. The Constitutional Court upheld lower-court findings that the blanket, no-exceptions ban unjustifiably limited the right to further education under section 29(1)(b) of the Constitution.
Read the full analysis →