Draft Superior Courts Amendment Bill Seeks to Limit Section 47 Gatekeeping

Posted 28 August 2026 Written by Acts Online
Category Justice

Brought to you by SA Legal Academy: An executive summary of a proposed Private Member’s Superior Courts Amendment Bill has been gazetted, proposing statutory restrictions on the litigation consent protections under section 47 of the Superior Courts Act, No. 10 of 2013.

Under section 47 of the Superior Courts Act, No. 10 of 2013, no civil proceedings may be instituted against a judge of a Superior Court without the prior consent of the head of that court. The draft Bill, sponsored by uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party Member of Parliament Mzwanele Manyi, proposes to limit the application of this gatekeeping provision strictly to civil proceedings related to judicial activities.

The draft proposal seeks to amend the statute to expressly exclude judges from section 47 protection when participating in functions deemed extra-judicial, including:

  • Disciplinary tribunals;
  • Workplace labour processes;
  • Compliance processes and administrative investigations; and
  • Arbitrations and mediations.

The explanatory memorandum states that non-judicial professionals heading similar dispute resolution and administrative processes do not receive statutory immunity or procedural protections. Applying section 47 to judges in extra-judicial settings is asserted to conflict with section 9(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, which guarantees equality before the law and equal protection and benefit of the law.

Interested parties and stakeholders have been invited to submit written representations on the proposed legislation by 27 September 2026.

What this means for you, your business, or your clients

  • For yourself: Legal practitioners and dispute resolution specialists must track the proposed procedural shift when considering legal remedies or review proceedings arising from extra-judicial tribunals.
  • For your business: Law firms and dispute resolution bodies appointing sitting or retired judges to arbitrations, workplace disciplinary hearings, or compliance inquiries should monitor the potential exposure to direct civil litigation without prior judicial consent.
  • For your clients: Corporate and individual clients entering private arbitrations or administrative inquiries led by judges will face fewer procedural hurdles if seeking civil recourse, should the statutory carve-out be enacted.

Originally published at https://legalacademy.co.za/news/read/superior-courts-act-mk-to-table-bill-limiting-section-47-gatekeeping

The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Acts Online. Acts Online accepts no responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or fairness of the article, nor does the information contained herein constitute advice, legal or otherwise.