| dc.date.accessioned | 2017-04-08T17:04:53Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2017-04-08T17:04:53Z | |
| dc.date.created | 2006-02-14 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | [2007] ZACC 5 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2007 (5) SA 323 (CC) | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 2007 (7) BCLR 691 (CC | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2513 | |
| dc.title | Barkhuizen v Napier | en |
| dc.title.alternative | CCT72/05 | en |
| dc.identifier.casenumber | CCT72/05 | en |
| dc.contributor.judge | Ngcobo J Majority judgment | |
| dc.contributor.judge | Moseneke DCJ dissenting judgment Sachs J dissenting judgment | |
| dc.contributor.judge | Langa CJ separate judgment O'Regan J separate judgment | |
| dc.date.judgment | 4 April 2007 | |
| dc.link.judgment | http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2513/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%20%28572%20Kb%29-11056.pdf?sequence=14&isAllowed=y | |
| dc.concourt.synopsis | Constitutional challenge under section 34 to a time limitation clause in a short-term insurance contract requiring the applicant to institute court proceedings within 90 days.The clause was held not to be unconstitutional or contrary to public policy. Majority: Ngcobo J (concurring Madala J, Nkabinde J, Skweyiya J, Van der Westhuizen J and Yacoob J) Separate Concurrences: O'Regan J, Langa CJ Dissents: Sachs J, Moseneke DCJ (concurring Mokgoro J) | |
| dc.concourt.casehistory | Application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court against a decision of the SCA, reported as Napier v Barkhuizen 2006 (4) SA 1 (SCA); 2006 (9) BCLR 1011 (SCA). |