R v Hildick-Smith 1924 TPD 68 81

R v Lewinsohn 1922 TPD 336

R v Forlee 1917 TPD 52

R v Herman 1937 AD 168

Santam Insurance Ltd v Taylor 1985 (1) SA 514 (A)

Shoprite Checkers (Pty) Ltd v Ramdaw 2001 (3) SA 68 (LC)

Nissan SA (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for Inland Revenue 1998 (4) 860 (SCA)

National Union of Mineworkers of SA v Driveline Technologies 2003 (4) SA 645 (LAC)

the text of the legislation stipulates more than its purpose

the text of the legislation is vague, unclear and ambiguous

the initial meaning of the text is in conflict with the Constitution

the text of the legislation stipulates less than its purpose

Kalla v The Master 1995 (1) SA 261 (T) 269C-G

Qozeleni v Minister of Law and Order 1994 (3) SA 625 (E)

Govender v Minister of Safety and Security 2001 (4) SA 273 (SCA)

Mateis v Ngwathe Plaaslike Munisipaliteit 2003 (4) SA 361 (SCA),

Any law, proclamation, ordinance, Act of Parliament, all by-laws, rules, regulations, or order and any other enactment having the force of law

Any law, proclamation, ordinance, Act of Parliament, all by-laws, rules, Green and White papers, and any other enactment having the force of law

Any law, proclamation, ordinance, Act of Parliament, all by-laws, rules, legal notices, advertisements and any other enactment having the force of law

Any law, proclamation, ordinance, Act of Parliament, all by-laws, rules, legal notices, and any other enactment having the force of law

the court had to interpret section 10(1) of the Stock Theft Act 26 of 1923

the court had to interpret section 2(1)(b) of the Legal Deposit of Publications Act 17 of 1982

the court heard an appeal against the decision of a magistrate's court in which the accused was found guilty of contravening a municipal by-law because he kept a duck within the municipal boundaries without the required licence

the court heard an appeal against the decision of a magistrate's court in which the accused was found guilty of contravening a municipal by-law because he kept a peacock within the municipal boundaries without the required licence.

That it should be made known to the population to who it applies.

That the population should have ample time to comment on it.

That legislation should only pass with a popular mandate from the masses.

That it should be gazetted in keeping with common law traditions.

the accused was charged with the performance of illegal abortions in terms of the Abortion and Sterilisation Act 2 of 1975.

The Appellate Division held that the testimony of language experts was not admissable as an aid in construing legislation.

the case dealt with a claim for damages after a police vehicle had collided with a private motorcar.

the accused was charged with being behind the wheel of a vehicle that was being pushed by a group of people on a public without a driver's licence.

Constitutional sovereignty

Judicial sovereignty

Executive sovereignty

Parliamentary sovereignty

When legislation deals with the limitations clause of section 36 of the Constitution.

When legislation does not change procedure.

When legislation changes procedure.

Denies a benefit to an accused.