Browse all documents

African Climate Alliance & Others v Minister of Mineral Resources & Energy and Others – #CancelCoal Case – High Court

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria, ruled in the #CancelCoal case that the South African government's plan to add 1500 megawatts of new coal-fired electricity generation to the 2019 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) was unlawful and invalid. The court found that the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy and the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) failed to consider the environmental and health impacts of this additional capacity, particularly regarding the rights of children.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The High Court upheld a constitutional challenge against the decisions of the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy and NERSA to include 1500 megawatts of new coal-fired power in the 2019 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). The court declared these decisions unlawful and invalid, setting them aside and ordering the Minister and NERSA to pay costs.
  • The court determined that the Minister failed to fulfill constitutional obligations because there was no evidence that the environmental or health impacts of the additional 1500 megawatts of coal-fired power were assessed, specifically concerning the health of the nation and children.
  • The court found that the decisions to include the additional coal power would negatively impact the rights of children under sections 24 and 28 of the Constitution, and the Minister provided no cogent evidence to dispute this or to show that such limitations on rights were reasonable and justifiable.
  • While the court ruled that the IRP was not a decision by an organ of state and therefore not subject to review under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA), it found the conduct reviewable under the constitutional principle of legality.

Cite the original document

APA
Danjelle (2024). African Climate Alliance & Others v Minister of Mineral Resources & Energy and Others – #CancelCoal Case – High Court. Centre for Environmental Rights. https://cer.org.za/virtual-library/judgments/high-courts/african-climate-alliance-others-v-minister-of-mineral-resources-energy-and-others
Chicago
Danjelle. African Climate Alliance & Others v Minister of Mineral Resources & Energy and Others – #CancelCoal Case – High Court. Centre for Environmental Rights, 2024. https://cer.org.za/virtual-library/judgments/high-courts/african-climate-alliance-others-v-minister-of-mineral-resources-energy-and-others.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Danjelle |title=African Climate Alliance & Others v Minister of Mineral Resources & Energy and Others – #CancelCoal Case – High Court |publisher=Centre for Environmental Rights |date=4 December 2024 |url=https://cer.org.za/virtual-library/judgments/high-courts/african-climate-alliance-others-v-minister-of-mineral-resources-energy-and-others |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{danjelle2024african, author = {Danjelle}, title = {{African Climate Alliance \& Others v Minister of Mineral Resources \& Energy and Others – \#CancelCoal Case – High Court}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, year = {2024}, month = dec, url = {https://cer.org.za/virtual-library/judgments/high-courts/african-climate-alliance-others-v-minister-of-mineral-resources-energy-and-others}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated