Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract This article explores when constitutional damages can and should be awarded in South African law. The history of the divergence between common-law damages and constitutional damages (and the uncertainty that might arise about which type of damages a victim of an injury ought to pursue) is explored. Thereafter, a critical and constructive interpretation of the case law on constitutional damages is provided, which sets the scene for a precedent-inspired three-step approach to constitutional damages adjudication. This approach is then defended as a transformative constitutional one which squares easily against the notion of constitutional adjudicative subsidiarity.
Emile Zitzke (Fri,) studied this question.