375:, the Constitutional Court was unanimous in dismissing the applicants' appeal and upholding the city's cross-appeal, thereby setting aside the orders of both lower courts and affirming the lawfulness of the city's prevailing policy in Phiri. In contradistinction to the lower courts, the Constitutional Court declined to entertain arguments about the objective minimum quantity of water that qualified as "sufficient" for the purposes of section 27(1)(b). Instead, the Constitutional Court assessed the constitutionality of the city's policy by submitting it to
31:
347:. Writing for the unanimous bench, Streicher agreed with the High Court that the prevailing free basic water allowance was insufficient to fulfil the state's obligations under section 27(1) of the Constitution. However, he held that 42 litres of water per day was "sufficient" water in terms of section 27(1). The High Court's order was therefore replaced with an order declaring that the city was obliged, to the extent that it was
279:, nor the state's obligation, in terms of section 27(2), to "take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation" of that right. The installation of prepaid meters allowed the state to inhibit residents' access to water, and prepaid meters – unlike meters that dispensed water
410:, but the scope of that obligation was delineated not by a fixed "minimum core" of socioeconomic entitlement but instead by the section 27(2) requirement that the state should take "reasonable" measures, "within its available resources". Moreover, the judiciary was not well placed, either practically or constitutionally (under the
421:
Thus turning to a reasonableness review, the court found that the City of
Johannesburg's policy in Phiri was reasonable and lawful; both the six kilolitre free basic water allowance and the introduction of prepaid metres were compliant with section 27 of the Constitution, with the Water Services Act,
351:
to do so, to provide 42 litres of water per day to each Phiri resident who could not afford to pay for such water. The city was ordered to reformulate its free water policy in light of this declaration, and in the interim it was ordered to provide each indigent Phiri resident with a free allowance of
323:
found in favour of the applicants, setting aside the six kilolitre limit on the free basic water allowance; the City of
Johannesburg was ordered to provide the applicants, and all similarly situated residents of Phiri, with a free basic water allowance of 50 litres per person per day (about twice the
243:
of water per household per month. However, according to the City of
Johannesburg and its water services company, Johannesburg Water, average household water consumption in Soweto was in fact about 67 kilolitres per month, far in excess of deemed consumption, though it was not clear what proportion of
788:
283:– did not protect residents' access to water against administrative errors and household emergencies: among the applicants, Lindiwe Mazibuko's water had been disconnected erroneously for several months in 2004, and two children died in a
418:), to "investigate social conditions in the light of available budgets and to determine what targets are achievable in relation to social and economic rights" at any given time; that task should rest with the legislature and executive.
263:
in households. The flat-rate pricing system was discontinued; instead, each household received a free monthly allowance of six kilolitres of water, and any consumption over that amount had to be pre-paid for.
267:
The applicants challenged the constitutionality both of the installation of prepaid meters and of the six kilolitre limit on free basic water. They contended that six kilolitres did not fulfil their "
1072:"Women's socio-economic [in]equality and gender [in]justice: Feminist reflections on the right of access to water in Mazibuko and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others"
442:
reasoning and its normatively sparse, institutionally deferent and procedurally-fixated employ of the reasonableness inquiry". Although some commentators agreed with the court that its
388:
1254:
480:
858:"The Relationship between Courts and the Other Arms of Government in Promoting and Protecting Socio-economic Rights in South Africa: What About Separation of Powers?"
272:
228:
287:
on
Vusimuzi Paki's property after he was unable to access tap water with which to distinguish the blaze. Moreover, insofar as households in the majority-white
613:"Socio-economic Rights Adjudication and Democratic Urban Governance: Reassessing the "Second Wave" Jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional Court"
312:
382:
This approach arose from O'Regan's finding that it was not appropriate for the courts to delineate the normative content of the section 27 right to water
1164:
1259:
352:
42 litres per day. The
Supreme Court also found that the use of prepaid meter was unlawful in terms of the city's prevailing Water Service By-Laws.
291:
were permitted to install credit meters as an alternative to prepaid meters, the compulsory installation of prepaid meters in Phiri was unfair and
1264:
328:
107:
1184:
484:
and others – as part of a "second wave" of
Constitutional Court jurisprudence on socioeconomic rights, defined by its increased concern with
359:, seeking a substantial reinstatement of the High Court's more favourable order; the City of Johannesburg and Johannesburg Water applied to
356:
196:
41:
386:
a specific determination of a minimum amount of water that the state was obligated to ensure for all residents. As the court had found in
1047:""Dreams and aspirations deferred?": The Constitutional Court's approach to the fulfilment of socio-economic rights in the Constitution"
248:
from corroded pipes. In addition, many residents did not pay the flat-rate consumption charges, leading to a serious revenue shortfall.
1195:
991:
398:
259:
for "Operation
Conserve Water") plan, which was implemented as a pilot project in Phiri in 2004. Under the plan, the City installed
376:
926:"Can Human Rights Transcend the Commercialization of Water in South Africa? Soweto's Legal Fight for an Equitable Water Policy"
431:
363:
the decision. The
Constitutional Court heard arguments on 2 September 2009, and judgment was handed down on 8 October 2009.
320:
276:
122:
644:"In the face of judicial deference: Taking the "minimum core" of socio-economic rights to the local government sphere"
683:"Reasonableness in Retreat? The Judgment of the South African Constitutional Court in Mazibuko v City of Johnnesburg"
556:
582:
308:
118:
324:
prevailing allowance). The prepaid water system in Phiri was additionally declared unconstitutional and unlawful.
438:
has been derided for its "limited conception of the role of socio-economic rights litigation, as well as for its
169:
415:
288:
216:
30:
758:
407:
958:
892:
789:"After Mazibuko: Exploring the responses of communities excluded from South Africa's water experiment"
853:
720:
530:
504:
459:
411:
1071:
1212:
485:
724:
1232:
1180:
1151:
1116:
1091:
1058:
1030:
978:
945:
912:
879:
841:
808:
736:
702:
663:
624:
455:
165:
1224:
1172:
1141:
1083:
1020:
970:
937:
904:
869:
833:
800:
694:
655:
393:
336:
1104:
925:
821:
1196:"The Right of Access to Adequate Water: Discussion of Mazibuko v the City of Johannesburg"
1046:
857:
822:"Avoiding Mazibuko: water security and constitutional rights in Southern African case law"
643:
439:
403:
372:
204:
157:
992:"Judicially Enforceable Socio-Economic Rights in South Africa: Between Light and Shadow"
203:. It was decided on 8 October 2009 in a unanimous judgment, the last written by Justice
1042:
348:
332:
331:, where its appeal was partly upheld on 25 March 2009 by Hurt AJA and Judges of Appeal
292:
280:
268:
260:
200:
145:
114:
1248:
754:
467:
316:
256:
245:
220:
103:
908:
360:
344:
304:
232:
137:
84:
1228:
1129:
1008:
1087:
406:), the government had a positive constitutional obligation to promote residents'
340:
161:
804:
284:
153:
1236:
1155:
1120:
1095:
1062:
1034:
982:
949:
941:
916:
883:
845:
812:
740:
706:
667:
628:
1146:
240:
236:
141:
1176:
1025:
874:
837:
698:
474:
as "rather innovative" and "rather unconvincing". Indeed, Pieterse viewed
149:
612:
1009:"Dismantling apartheid geography: transformation and the limits of law"
1213:"The Justiciability of Water Rights: Mazibuko v. City of Johannesburg"
682:
659:
454:, others viewed it as a retreat from the court's more progressive and
311:
to sue the City of
Johannesburg, Johannesburg Water, and the national
251:
To address this situation, Johannesburg Water developed the
Operation
974:
959:"The Human Right to Water in South Africa and the Mazibuko Decisions"
244:
the excess was consumed by residents and what proportion was lost to
224:
1105:"The role of the courts in advancing water security in South Africa"
725:"Twenty Years of Constitutional Democracy: A Preliminary Reflection"
466:'s "open ended and flexible" model of reasonableness review, and
1130:"Lessons from Mazibuko: persistent inequality and the commons"
231:. Until 2004, households in Soweto had access to an unlimited
893:"Rights, Regulation and Resistance: The Phiri Water Campaign"
315:. The Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions was admitted as
355:
The applicants appealed the Supreme Court's decision to the
1169:
The Quest for Constitutionalism: South Africa since 1994
52:
Mazibuko and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others
192:
Mazibuko and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others
112:
Mazibuko and Others v City of Johannesburg and Others
101:
City of Johannesburg and Others v Mazibuko and Others
481:
Residents of Joe Slovo Community v Thubelisha Homes
215:The applicants were five indigent residents of the
180:
175:
133:
128:
96:
91:
80:
72:
57:
47:
37:
23:
557:"Jo'burg water policy discriminatory, court told"
583:"Court rules prepaid water meters not illegal"
399:Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign
229:City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality
199:concerning the content of the constitutional
8:
87:; 2010 (3) BCLR 239 (CC); 2010 (4) SA 1 (CC)
239:on the basis of a deemed consumption of 20
1255:Constitutional Court of South Africa cases
29:
20:
1145:
1024:
873:
957:Humby, Tracy; Grandbois, Maryse (2010).
269:right to have access to sufficient water
496:
313:Minister for Water Affairs and Forestry
1165:"Depoliticising Socio-economic Rights"
422:1997, and with the city's own bylaws.
404:right of access to healthcare services
327:The City appealed the decision to the
1109:Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad
930:Review of Radical Political Economics
897:South African Journal on Human Rights
862:Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad
826:Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad
7:
606:
604:
357:Constitutional Court of South Africa
197:Constitutional Court of South Africa
42:Constitutional Court of South Africa
1194:Van Rensburg, Linda Jansen (2008).
759:"Water is life (but life is cheap)"
319:. On 30 April 2008, Tsoka J of the
235:, for which they were charged at a
1070:Nadarajan Perumal, Devina (2011).
446:ruling followed from precedent in
14:
531:"A 'Phiric' victory for the poor"
371:In a judgment written by Justice
1260:South African administrative law
1051:Law, Democracy & Development
648:Law, Democracy & Development
470:described its interpretation of
307:, the applicants applied in the
617:Verfassung und Recht in Übersee
505:"Phiri water war goes to court"
24:Mazibuko v City of Johannesburg
1265:2009 in South African case law
909:10.1080/19962126.2008.11864972
462:viewed it as a deviation from
195:is a landmark decision of the
1:
1229:10.1080/08039410.2009.9666424
1217:Forum for Development Studies
996:Dublin University Law Journal
642:Fuo, O. (16 September 2015).
458:stance in those cases; Judge
1088:10.1080/10130950.2011.575991
787:Cooper, Nathan John (2017).
681:Wesson, M. (26 March 2011).
321:Witwatersrand Local Division
123:Witwatersrand Local Division
1134:Constitutional Court Review
1013:Constitutional Court Review
990:Liebenberg, Sandra (2014).
488:to the political branches.
227:, which is governed by the
1281:
1211:Williams, Lucy A. (2009).
434:academic Marius Pieterse,
426:Reception and significance
309:High Court of South Africa
119:High Court of South Africa
1128:Roithmayr, Daria (2010).
1007:Madlalate, Ralph (2019).
805:10.1017/S0021855317000055
763:Constitutionally Speaking
611:Pieterse, Marius (2018).
472:Treatment Action Campaign
452:Treatment Action Campaign
416:democratic accountability
115:[2008] ZAGPHC 491
28:
942:10.1177/0486613410368495
201:right of access to water
61:8 October 2009
16:South African legal case
1200:Stellenbosch Law Review
1163:Stewart, Linda (2016).
1103:Qumbu, Bronwen (2021).
924:Dugard, Jackie (2010).
891:Dugard, Jackie (2008).
687:Human Rights Law Review
587:The Mail & Guardian
561:The Mail & Guardian
535:The Mail & Guardian
509:The Mail & Guardian
329:Supreme Court of Appeal
289:suburbs of Johannesburg
207:before her retirement.
108:Supreme Court of Appeal
104:[2009] ZASCA 20
793:Journal of African Law
389:Government v Grootboom
85:[2009] ZACC 28
1177:10.4324/9781315553702
1171:. London: Routledge.
1147:10.2989/CCR/2010.0012
1026:10.2989/CCR.2019.0008
875:10.4314/pelj.v15i5.20
838:10.4314/pelj.v18i4.12
377:reasonableness review
184:O'Regan J (unanimous)
963:Les Cahiers de droit
820:Couzens, Ed (2015).
430:In the summation of
412:separation of powers
408:socioeconomic rights
170:van der Westhuizen J
757:(13 October 2009).
699:10.1093/hrlr/ngr002
723:(1 January 2016).
563:. 2 September 2009
486:judicial deference
261:pre-payment meters
1186:978-1-315-55370-2
660:10.4314/ldd.v19i1
511:. 9 December 2007
188:
187:
1272:
1240:
1207:
1190:
1159:
1149:
1124:
1099:
1066:
1038:
1028:
1003:
986:
975:10.7202/045722ar
969:(3–4): 521–540.
953:
920:
887:
877:
854:Davis, Dennis M.
849:
832:(4): 1162–1186.
816:
774:
773:
771:
769:
751:
745:
744:
721:Davis, Dennis M.
717:
711:
710:
678:
672:
671:
639:
633:
632:
608:
599:
598:
596:
594:
589:. 8 October 2009
579:
573:
572:
570:
568:
553:
547:
546:
544:
542:
527:
521:
520:
518:
516:
501:
394:right to housing
337:Kenneth Mthiyane
129:Court membership
68:
66:
33:
21:
1280:
1279:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1210:
1193:
1187:
1162:
1127:
1102:
1069:
1043:Majiedt, Steven
1041:
1006:
989:
956:
923:
890:
852:
819:
786:
782:
780:Further reading
777:
767:
765:
753:
752:
748:
729:NYLS Law Review
719:
718:
714:
680:
679:
675:
641:
640:
636:
610:
609:
602:
592:
590:
581:
580:
576:
566:
564:
555:
554:
550:
540:
538:
529:
528:
524:
514:
512:
503:
502:
498:
494:
428:
414:and demands of
369:
305:Wim Trengove SC
303:Represented by
301:
271:", in terms of
233:supply of water
213:
110:
64:
62:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1278:
1276:
1268:
1267:
1262:
1257:
1247:
1246:
1242:
1241:
1208:
1191:
1185:
1160:
1140:(1): 317–346.
1125:
1100:
1067:
1039:
1019:(1): 195–217.
1004:
987:
954:
936:(2): 175–194.
921:
903:(3): 593–611.
888:
850:
817:
783:
781:
778:
776:
775:
755:de Vos, Pierre
746:
712:
693:(2): 390–405.
673:
634:
600:
574:
548:
537:. 21 July 2009
522:
495:
493:
490:
427:
424:
368:
365:
333:Piet Streicher
300:
297:
293:discriminatory
275:(1)(b) of the
212:
209:
186:
185:
182:
178:
177:
173:
172:
135:
134:Judges sitting
131:
130:
126:
125:
98:
94:
93:
89:
88:
82:
78:
77:
74:
70:
69:
59:
55:
54:
49:
48:Full case name
45:
44:
39:
35:
34:
26:
25:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1277:
1266:
1263:
1261:
1258:
1256:
1253:
1252:
1250:
1238:
1234:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1192:
1188:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1161:
1157:
1153:
1148:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1027:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1005:
1001:
997:
993:
988:
984:
980:
976:
972:
968:
964:
960:
955:
951:
947:
943:
939:
935:
931:
927:
922:
918:
914:
910:
906:
902:
898:
894:
889:
885:
881:
876:
871:
867:
863:
859:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
831:
827:
823:
818:
814:
810:
806:
802:
798:
794:
790:
785:
784:
779:
764:
760:
756:
750:
747:
742:
738:
734:
730:
726:
722:
716:
713:
708:
704:
700:
696:
692:
688:
684:
677:
674:
669:
665:
661:
657:
653:
649:
645:
638:
635:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
607:
605:
601:
588:
584:
578:
575:
562:
558:
552:
549:
536:
532:
526:
523:
510:
506:
500:
497:
491:
489:
487:
483:
482:
478:– along with
477:
473:
469:
468:Pierre de Vos
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
441:
437:
433:
425:
423:
419:
417:
413:
409:
405:
401:
400:
395:
391:
390:
385:
380:
378:
374:
366:
364:
362:
358:
353:
350:
346:
342:
338:
334:
330:
325:
322:
318:
317:amicus curiae
314:
310:
306:
299:Prior actions
298:
296:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
270:
265:
262:
258:
254:
249:
247:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
222:
218:
210:
208:
206:
202:
198:
194:
193:
183:
179:
176:Case opinions
174:
171:
167:
163:
159:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
136:
132:
127:
124:
120:
116:
113:
109:
105:
102:
99:
97:Prior actions
95:
90:
86:
83:
79:
75:
71:
60:
56:
53:
50:
46:
43:
40:
36:
32:
27:
22:
19:
1220:
1216:
1203:
1199:
1168:
1137:
1133:
1112:
1108:
1082:(2): 17–26.
1079:
1075:
1054:
1050:
1016:
1012:
999:
995:
966:
962:
933:
929:
900:
896:
865:
861:
829:
825:
799:(1): 57–81.
796:
792:
766:. Retrieved
762:
749:
732:
728:
715:
690:
686:
676:
651:
647:
637:
623:(1): 12–34.
620:
616:
591:. Retrieved
586:
577:
565:. Retrieved
560:
551:
539:. Retrieved
534:
525:
513:. Retrieved
508:
499:
479:
475:
471:
463:
460:Dennis Davis
451:
447:
443:
435:
429:
420:
397:
387:
383:
381:
373:Kate O'Regan
370:
361:cross-appeal
354:
345:Mandisa Maya
326:
302:
277:Constitution
266:
252:
250:
214:
205:Kate O'Regan
191:
190:
189:
138:Moseneke DCJ
111:
100:
92:Case history
51:
18:
1223:(1): 5–48.
341:Chris Jafta
253:Gcin'amanzi
181:Decision by
73:Docket nos.
1249:Categories
768:7 February
593:7 February
567:7 February
541:7 February
515:7 February
492:References
349:reasonable
285:house fire
273:section 27
241:kilolitres
211:Background
166:Skweyiya J
154:Nkabinde J
65:2009-10-08
1237:0803-9410
1156:2073-6215
1121:1727-3781
1096:1013-0950
1063:2077-4907
1035:2073-6215
983:0007-974X
950:0486-6134
917:0258-7203
884:1727-3781
846:1727-3781
813:0021-8553
741:0145-448X
707:1461-7781
668:2077-4907
629:0506-7286
464:Grootboom
448:Grootboom
440:formalist
281:on credit
237:flat rate
158:O'Regan J
146:Mokgoro J
142:Cameron J
81:Citations
76:CCT 39/09
1045:(2022).
856:(2012).
654:: 1–28.
476:Mazibuko
456:activist
444:Mazibuko
436:Mazibuko
402:(on the
392:(on the
367:Judgment
217:township
150:Ngcobo J
246:leakage
162:Sachs J
117:in the
106:in the
63: (
58:Decided
1235:
1206:: 415.
1183:
1154:
1119:
1094:
1076:Agenda
1061:
1033:
1002:: 137.
981:
948:
915:
882:
844:
811:
739:
705:
666:
627:
396:) and
343:, and
225:Soweto
1115:(1).
1057:(1).
868:(5).
735:(1).
221:Phiri
38:Court
1233:ISSN
1181:ISBN
1152:ISSN
1117:ISSN
1092:ISSN
1059:ISSN
1031:ISSN
979:ISSN
946:ISSN
913:ISSN
880:ISSN
842:ISSN
809:ISSN
770:2024
737:ISSN
703:ISSN
664:ISSN
625:ISSN
595:2024
569:2024
543:2024
517:2024
450:and
432:Wits
384:viz.
257:Zulu
168:and
1225:doi
1173:doi
1142:doi
1084:doi
1021:doi
971:doi
938:doi
905:doi
870:doi
834:doi
801:doi
695:doi
656:doi
223:in
219:of
1251::
1231:.
1221:36
1219:.
1215:.
1204:19
1202:.
1198:.
1179:.
1167:.
1150:.
1136:.
1132:.
1113:24
1111:.
1107:.
1090:.
1080:25
1078:.
1074:.
1055:26
1053:.
1049:.
1029:.
1015:.
1011:.
1000:37
998:.
994:.
977:.
967:51
965:.
961:.
944:.
934:42
932:.
928:.
911:.
901:24
899:.
895:.
878:.
866:15
864:.
860:.
840:.
830:18
828:.
824:.
807:.
797:61
795:.
791:.
761:.
733:60
731:.
727:.
701:.
691:11
689:.
685:.
662:.
652:19
650:.
646:.
621:51
619:.
615:.
603:^
585:.
559:.
533:.
507:.
379:.
339:,
335:,
295:.
164:,
160:,
156:,
152:,
148:,
144:,
140:,
121:,
1239:.
1227::
1189:.
1175::
1158:.
1144::
1138:3
1123:.
1098:.
1086::
1065:.
1037:.
1023::
1017:9
985:.
973::
952:.
940::
919:.
907::
886:.
872::
848:.
836::
815:.
803::
772:.
743:.
709:.
697::
670:.
658::
631:.
597:.
571:.
545:.
519:.
255:(
67:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
