Mazibuko v. City of Johannesburg
South Africa Constitutional Court
2010 (4) SA 1 (2010)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
The City of Johannesburg (the city) (defendant) implemented a Free Basic Water policy (FBW policy) that set a monthly minimum amount of water the city would deliver to the city’s residents for free. The city also installed prepaid water meters to deliver more water than the free water available under the FBW policy. The city reevaluated and adjusted the FBW policy on an ongoing basis, partly spurred by litigation. Lindiwe Mazibuko and others (collectively, Mazibuko) sued the city and other government agencies, arguing that the city had a constitutional obligation to afford free water, the amount of free water under the FBW policy was insufficient, and the court should set the standard of free-water availability. The South Africa constitution recognizes a right to water access. The Supreme Court of Appeal and the high court issued orders supporting Mazibuko. The city appealed to the South Africa Constitutional Court, arguing that the city’s steps to provide access to water were reasonable and, therefore, constitutional.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (O’Regan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
