| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-08T17:03:04Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-04-08T17:03:04Z | |
| dc.date.created | 2005-03-11 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | [2005] ZACC 17 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2006 (2) BCLR 253 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2006 (2) SA 289 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2226 | |
| dc.title | Omar v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others (Commission for Gender Equality as Amicus Curiae) | en |
| dc.title.alternative | CCT47/04 | en |
| dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT47/04 | en |
| dc.date.hearing | 5 May 2005 | |
| dc.contributor.judge | Van der Westhuizen J | |
| dc.date.judgment | 7 November 2005 | |
| dc.link.judgment | http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2226/Full%20Judgment%20%28133%20KB%29-5007.pdf?sequence=14&isAllowed=y | |
| dc.concourt.synopsis | Application for leave to appeal against the High Court's dismissal of an application to declare section 8 of the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 unconstitutional. Van der Westhuizen J, writing for a unanimous Court, dismissed the application for leave to appeal. The Act serves an important social and legal purpose in addressing domestic violence and South Africa's obligations under the Constitution and international law to combat domestic violence. Any possibility that complainants will manipulate the Act does not render it unconstitutional, as the possibility of manipulation is far outweighed by the potential of the Act to afford police protection to the victims of domestic violence. | |
| dc.concourt.casehistory | An application for direct access to the Constitutional Court was previously dismissed and the applicant was directed to first approach the High Court, reported as Ex Parte Omar 2003 (10) BCLR 1087 (CC). This case is an appeal to the Constitutional Court against the judgment and order of the Pietermaritzburg High Court: Omar v Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others, Case Number 3501/03. Three previous protection orders were issued against the applicant under Case Numbers 113/2003 and 143/2003 in the Durban Magistrates' Court and under Case Number 880/2003 in the Verulam Magistrates' Court |