Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:00:54Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:00:54Z
dc.date.created 2003-10-30 en
dc.identifier.citation [2002] ZACC 18; 2002 (6) SA 1 (CC); 2002 (9) BCLR 986 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2002 (6) SA 1 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2002 (9) BCLR 986 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2145
dc.title Satchwell v President of the Republic of South Africa and Another en
dc.title.alternative CCT45/01 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT45/01 en
dc.date.hearing 26 February 2002
dc.contributor.judge Madala J
dc.date.judgment 25 July 2002
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2145/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%2025%20July%202002.pdf?sequence=17&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Constitutionality of ss 8 and 9 of the Judges Remuneration and Conditions of Services Act which give benefits to the spouses of judges but not their same sex life partners. Madala J in a unanimous decision found that benefits should be afforded to same sex partners of judges where reciprocal duties entailed in a marriage can be shown in the same sex relationship. The Court ordered ss 8 and 9 to be read as applying to same sex partners with the above mentioned qualification.
dc.concourt.casehistory Satchwell v President of the RSA and Another 2001 (12) BCLR 1284 (T) reversed on appeal.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account