| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-08T16:59:48Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-04-08T16:59:48Z | |
| dc.date.created | 2003-12-11 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | [2001] ZACC 22 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2001 (4) SA 938 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2001 (10) BCLR 995 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2116 | |
| dc.title | Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (Centre for Applied Legal Studies Intervening) | en |
| dc.title.alternative | CCT48/00 | en |
| dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT48/00 | en |
| dc.date.hearing | 20 March 2001 | |
| dc.contributor.judge | Ackermann Goldstone JJ | |
| dc.date.judgment | 16 August 2001 | |
| dc.link.judgment | http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2116/Full%20judgment%20%28170%20Kb%29-13187.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y | |
| dc.concourt.synopsis | Constitutional obligation on the courts to develop the common law to promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights. The Court (per Ackermann and Goldstone JJ) held that, although the major engine for law reform should be the legislature, courts are under a general duty to develop the common law when it deviates from the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights. | |
| dc.concourt.casehistory | Cape of Good Hope High Court granted an order of absolution from the instance: Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security 2003 (2) SA 656 (CC). Appeal to Supreme Court of Appeal was dismissed with costs: Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security 2001 (1) SA 489 (SCA). In casu application for special leave to appeal to Constitutional Court from the order of the Supreme Court of Appeal. |