Satchwell v President of the Republic of South Africa

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Satchwell v President of the Republic of South Africa
Constitutional court of South Africa.jpeg
Court Constitutional Court of South Africa
Full case name Satchwell v President of the Republic of South Africa and Another
Decided 25 July 2002 (2002-67-25)
Citation(s) [2002] ZACC 18, 2002 (9) BCLR 986 (CC), 2002 (6) SA 1 (CC)
Case history
Appealed from Transvaal Provincial Division
Subsequent action(s) [2003] ZACC 2 (17 March 2003), Constitutional Court
Court membership
Judges sitting Chaskalson CJ, Langa DCJ, Ackermann, Goldstone, Kriegler, Madala, Ngcobo, O'Regan & Sachs JJ, Du Plessis & Skweyiya AJJ
Case opinions
Decision by Madala

Satchwell v President of the Republic of South Africa and Another is a 2002 decision of the Constitutional Court of South Africa which determined that the same-sex life partner of a judge was entitled to the same financial benefits available to the opposite-sex spouse of a judge. The case, which challenged the Judges' Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act, 1989, was brought by Kathy Satchwell, an openly lesbian judge of the Transvaal Provincial Division (now known as the Gauteng Division) of the High Court.[1]

The court ruled unanimously that the law violated the equality clause of the Bill of Rights, which forbids unfair discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The judgment therefore amended the law to extend the spousal benefits to same-sex partners who had undertaken "reciprocal duties of support". Although the holding, strictly speaking, was limited to judges and their partners, it was seen as having a wider effect, with the director of the Lesbian and Gay Equality Project describing it as "yet another step toward the formal legal recognition of same-sex relationships".[1]

In 2003 it was realised that a new version of the act (the Judges' Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act, 2001) had been passed and, due to a drafting error, still included the former discriminatory language. The Constitutional Court granted an order applying the reasoning of its earlier ruling to the new act.[2]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  2. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

External links

<templatestyles src="Asbox/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Stub icon

This article relating to case law in South Africa is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

<templatestyles src="Asbox/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Stub icon

This article about lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender-related law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Satchwell_v_President_of_the_Republic_of_South_Africa&oldid=678251508"