REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
(1) REPORTABLE : YES
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES
(3) REVISED: YES
18 March 2025
DATE SIGNATURE
In the matter between:
INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC JUSTICE
#P AYTHEGRANTS
and
MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIAL SECURITY AGENCY
MINISTER OF FINANCE
JUDGMENT Case Number: 071891/2023
First Applicant
Second Applicant
First Respondent
Second Respondent
Third Respondent
2
TWALA, J
[1] This is an application for leave to appeal launched by the respondents against
the whole of the judgment and order of this Court handed down electronically
on 23 January 2025 granting certain declaratory orders and other ancillary relief
in favour of the applicants together with an order for costs.
[2] In this judgment for the application for leave to appeal, I propose to refer to the
parties as they were referred to in the judgment to the main application. Further,
it is noteworthy that , for the sake of convenience, the Court directed that the
application for leave to appea l be determined on the papers without an oral
hearing.
[3] It is a trite principle of our law that leave to appeal may only be given where the
Judge or Judges concerned are of the opinion that the appeal would have a
reasonable prospect of success or whe re there is some other compelling reason
why the appeal should be heard, including conflicting judgments on the matter
under consideration.1
[4] The grounds for the leave to appeal are succinctly stated in the notice of
application for leave to appeal an d I do not intend to repeat them in this
judgment. Furthermore, I would like to extend my gratitude and appreciation to
the counsel s of the parties for the concise heads of argument and submissions
made therein.
[5] Although I am satisfied that I have considered all the issues and arguments
raised in this case in my main judgment, I am of the view that, due to the
complexity and seriousness of this case which impacts on the most vulnerable
1 See section 17 (1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Superior Courts Act, 10 of 2013.
and to almost thirty percent of the population, and the public interest that it
raises, it deserves the attention of the Supreme Comt of Appeal.
[ 6] I disagree with the applicants that this Court should grant leave to appeal only
ce1tain orders and not the whole of the judgment and order of this Comt. I say
so, because that will cause unnecessary delays in bringing this case, which has
profound implications on the poor and vulnerable members of the community,
to finality. Put differently, I am of the view that the interests of justice will be
better served if this case is heard by a Superior Court and in this instance, the
Supreme Comt of Appeal. Therefore, the application for leave to appeal the
judgment falls to be granted.
[7] In the result, the following order is made:
1. Leave to appeal the judgment of this Court dated 23 January 2024 to the
Supreme Comt of Appeal, is granted.
2. Costs to be costs in the appeal.
For the Applicants: TWALAML
Judge of the High Court of South Africa
Gauteng Division, Pretoria
Advocate J. Brickhill
Advocate MBE Mbikiwa
Advocate M Kritzinger
3
4
Instruc ted by: SERI Law Clinic
Tel: 011 356 5860
nkosinathi@seri -sa.org
For the First and Second Respondent s: Advocate T Ntoane
Instructed by: State Attorney – Pretoria
Tel: 012 309 1575
Tletageng@justice.gov.za
For the Third Respondent: Advocate G Marcus SC
Advocate A Friedman
Instructed by: State Attorney – Pretoria
Tel: 012 309 1575
pheMokoena@justice.gov.za
Date of Hearing: DECIDED ON THE PAPERS
Date of Judgment: 18 March 2025
Delivered: This judgment and order was prepared and authored by the Judge whose
name is reflected and is handed down electronically by circulation to the
Parties/their legal representatives by email and by uploading it to the
electronic file of this matter on Case Lines. The date of the order is
deemed to be the 18 March 2025.