1887

n Without Prejudice - Has the Judiciary been actively activist? : the law

Volume 9, Issue 2
  • ISSN : 1681-178X
USD

 

Abstract

The judgement of Nicholson J in and the subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal has provided the backdrop against which philosophies of judicial decision-making have been juxtaposed and debated. The result, which is noticeably "knee-jerk" in character, has been to paint the Zuma decision with the activist brush and the Appeal Court's decision with a minimalist one. But the recent decisions of the KwaZulu-Natal High Court and the Appeal Court do not accurately, if at all, illustrate the difference between the concepts of activist judicial decision-making and judicial restraint.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/jb_prej/9/2/EJC50738
2009-03-01
2016-12-11

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error