http://www.polity.org.za
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / Case Law / High Courts RSS ← Back
Africa|Business|Africa|South Africa|South Africa
Africa|Business|Africa||
africa-company|business|africa|south-africa|south-africa-region
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Verification Image. Please refresh the page if you cannot see this image.

Sponsored by

Close

Article Enquiry

Nandutu and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (11440/17) [2018] ZAWCHC 47

Verification Image. Please refresh the page if you cannot see this image.
Close

Embed Video

Nandutu and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (11440/17) [2018] ZAWCHC 47

20th April 2018

SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

[1] This is an application in terms of section 172(1)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (Act 108 of 1996) (the Constitution) to declare as invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution, Regulation 9(9)(a) of the Immigration Regulations (regulations) issued in terms of section 7 of the Immigration Act, 2002, (the Act) to the extent that the rights accorded by means of the exceptional circumstances contemplated in section 10(6)(b) of the Act are not extended to the foreign spouse or child of a citizen or permanent resident. The application is opposed by the first and second respondents.

[2] The remedy requested by the applicants is that this court exercise its powers in terms of section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution by reading in the words:

Advertisement

“(iii) is the spouse or child of a citizen or permanent resident”.

This, it is submitted, is in order to render Regulation 9(9)(a) valid and consistent with the Constitution.

Advertisement

[3] The constitutional challenge is based on the duty of the parties in a marriage or life partnership to cohabit and to provide each other with support. The fact that the foreign spouse of a citizen or permanent resident who holds a visitor’s visa is not exempted from the prohibition to apply for a change of status while in the Republic, it is argued, impairs the ability of the spouse to honour that obligation and is therefore an unjustifiable limitation of the right to dignity. It is further argued that the fact that the foreign accompanying spouse or child of the holder of a work or business visa is exempted, but not the holder of a visitor’s visa, is an unjustifiable limitation on the right to equality.

Read the full judgment here on Saflii

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE ARTICLE ENQUIRY

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options
Free daily email newsletter Register Now