This is an appeal against the judgment of the court. Respondents were accused of five counts including terrorism. The appeal was allowed and the order of the magistrate refusing bail was set aside.

The case is on automatic review. The question in place is whether the Court has the jurisdiction should it find that juvenile whippings against the Constitution are to be declared or set aside such sentences as invalid or unconstitutional. The accused were sentenced to reviewable sentences of suspended imprisonment and in addition the other two were sentenced to juvenile whipping. It was proposed that the case would be transferred to the Constitutional Court unless the representative of the State indicates in writing to the Registrar on or before 31 July 1994 that he proposes to present evidence in terms of the proviso to section 102(1) of the constitution.

Accused of furthering the aims of the Communist Party. The respondents were found not guilty and the case was dismissed.

The State is applying for an order to declare the shooting of the civilians unlawful and the respondents guilty of the act. On the evening of August 29, 1985 between 7:30 pm and 7:55 pm, there was a shooting incident at a premises in Armadasingel, Belleville-held south. The defendants, whom as members of the Belleville-riot unit of the South African Police Service fired seven shots with shotguns at pedestrians at the specified premises. The defendants were not found guilty and the case was dismissed.

This a case against the respondents who are officers in charge of a squad of members of the police. The respondents are aged 37 years and 33 years old and accused of unlawfully and willfully instructing the members of their police squad to assaulting members of the public who were protesting. The respondents were found not criminally liable for their actions and the case was dismissed.

A priest of the Dominican Order in the Roman Catholic Church was charged with contravening section 8 (1) of the Publications Act, No.42 of 1974 by wrongfully having in his possession a prohibited publication and by wrongfully distributing an undesirable publication. The accused was not found guilty on all charges.

This is an appeal against the court's ruling that the State President of South Africa has exceeded his powers. The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.

This is an appeal by the applicant to declare the strike by the respondents unlawful. The applicant is a public company which carries on the business of brewing throughout the Republic of South Africa. The appeal failed and there was no order as to the costs.

This is the extended day of the rule nisi calling upon the respondents to show cause, why the respondents and all persons holding under or on behalf of them should not restore possession of Portion 35 of the farm Lombardy No. 36 Registration Division I R in the Gauteng Province to the applicant. The rule nisi issued by the Court on 21 September 1995 was discharged with costs. The costs included the costs consequent upon the employment of two counsels.

The appeal was against a decision of the Cape High Court which found that the applicant was liable in damages for the wrongful and negligent conduct of the then provincial Minister of Agriculture, Planning and Tourism. The applicant is the Premier of the Western Cape who designated the provincial Minister of Agriculture, Planning and Tourism as the competent authority to administer the Act in that province. The appeal was upheld with costs including of two counsel.