Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T16:56:17Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T16:56:17Z
dc.date.created 2004-11-30 en
dc.identifier.citation [1996] ZACC 9
dc.identifier.citation 1996 (4) SA 197 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 1996 (6) BCLR 752 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/1994
dc.title Brink v Kitshoff NO en
dc.title.alternative CCT15/95 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT15/95 en
dc.date.hearing 9 November 1995
dc.contributor.judge Chaskalson P Majority judgment
dc.contributor.judge O'Regan J Majority judgment on the merits
dc.date.judgment 15 May 1996
dc.link.judgment https://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/1994/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%2015%20May%201996.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Section 44 of the Insurance Act 27 of 1943 which deprived married women of benefits of husband’s life insurance policies. Competence of referral under s. 102(1), direct access and invalidity of s. 44(1) and (2) because infringement of s. 8 of the Constitution A unanimous judgment written by Chaskalson P. O’Regan J (although concurring wrote a separate judgment).
dc.concourt.casehistory Adjudication of a referral to the Constitutional Court by the High Court regarding the constitutionality of ss 44(1) and 44(2) of Act 27 of 1943, relevant sections declared unconstitutional.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account