the High Court.[1] In his application for confirmation of the relevant paragraphs of the order of the High Court, however, Mr Gory asked that the Minister be ordered to pay his costs in the proceedings in this Court.
[63] The Minister relied on a number of judgments of this Court in support of the proposition that government departments should provide assistance to the courts by providing them with sufficient information in order to enable them to consider matters involving a constitutional challenge to legislation on full facts.[2] The Minister submitted that, as she had raised valid constitutional concerns in the High Court on the issue of retrospectivity, she had “done her duty” by assisting the High Court in arriving at a just and fair conclusion.
[64] The problem with this argument is that, despite the fact that the High Court did not limit its declaration of constitutional invalidity of section 1(1) of the Act in the manner suggested by the Minister in her affidavit, the Minister opposed Mr Gory’s application to this Court for confirmation of such declaration on the sole basis that Mr Gory had also asked for a costs order against her in this Court. Despite some initial confusion and uncertainty in argument before us, it was ultimately made clear that the Minister still abided by the concerns expressed in the answering affidavit on the
- ↑ Nevertheless, as pointed out above, the submissions made in the Minister’s answering affidavit did, in substance, constitute opposition to the relief sought by Mr Gory.
- ↑ See Minister of Justice v Ntuli 1997 (3) SA 772 (CC); 1997 (6) BCLR 677 (CC) at para 41; Khosa and Others v Minister of Social Development; Mahlaule v Minister of Social Development and Others 2004 (6) SA 505 (CC); 2004 (6) BCLR 569 (CC) at paras 13, 14, 19 and 25, S v Ntsele above n 36 at para 13; Parbhoo and Others v Getz NO and Another 1997 (4) SA 1095 (CC); 1997 (10) BCLR 1337 (CC) at para 5; S v Mello and Another 1998 (3) SA 712 (CC); 1998 (7) BCLR 908 (CC) at para 11; National Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Equality and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others above n 20 at para 7.
42
