+ General

Eastern Cape High Court orders the appointment of teachers in the Eastern Cape

The judgment of the Eastern Cape High Court, handed down on 3rd August 2012, is a groundbreaking vindication of the state’s duties to ensure children have a basic education.
SECTION27 salutes the Centre for Child Law, a number of School Governing Bodies from schools in the Eastern Cape and their legal team, the Legal Resources Centre (LRC), for this important victory for the rights of learners to learn and teachers to teach.

DBE obliged to declare post establishment

On Friday 3 August, the Eastern Cape High Court in Grahamstown ruled that the Department of Basic Education (DBE) is obliged to declare post establishments for both teaching and non-teaching staff for 2013 for public schools in the Eastern Cape.

DBE 'catch up plan' a violation of the court order and the agreement between SECTION27 and the Minister of Basic Education

Yesterday SECTION27 received the Department of Basic Education’s (DBE) progress report on the implementation of the catch-up plan (this and the catch-up plan are attached). While we are still studying and seeking expert input on the catch-up plan, we believe that it is inadequate and a clear violation of both the 17 May order of court and the settlement agreement between SECTION27 and the DBE which was made an order of court on 26 June.

TAC/Section27/CALS meeting with new Health MEC in Gauteng.

On the 27th July 2012, TAC/Section27/CALS met with Gauteng Health MEC Mr Hope Papo, HOD Dr Nomonde Xundu and heads of departments.
On the agenda for discussion was a formal response to TAC’s memorandum that was delivered at the Provincial Department of Health (PDOH) on the 12th June 2012.

TAC intervention leads to important legal advance: public interest concerns are relevant in determining interim interdict in patent cases

On 26 July 2012, the Supreme Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the matter between the Aventis group of pharmaceutical companies and Cipla’s group of generic pharmaceutical companies.

This is the first judgment to decisively say that public interest considerations must be taken into account when balancing the interests of the patentee and the infringer in determining whether or not to grant an interim interdict. The judgment is an important advance in the law that is in line with the values of the Constitution.