Browse all documents

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

This document consists of the practice note, chronology, and heads of argument filed by Arcelormittal South Africa Ltd (AMSA) in the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa. AMSA is appealing a High Court judgment that ordered it to disclose environmental records to the Vaal Environmental Justice Alliance (VEJA) under the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (PAIA). AMSA argues that VEJA failed to meet the 'need to know' threshold required for requests to private bodies and that there is no legal right for a private NGO to act as a regulatory 'watch-dog' to monitor a private company's environmental compliance.

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
  • AMSA contends that section 50(1)(a) of the PAIA establishes a 'threshold requirement' for requesters seeking information from private bodies, necessitating a demonstration of why records are 'required for the exercise or protection of any rights'.
  • AMSA argues that the right to a healthy environment under section 24 of the Constitution does not grant private citizens or NGOs a regulatory function to monitor private companies' compliance with environmental laws, as this role is reserved for state authorities.
  • AMSA asserts that the 'Environmental Master Plan' requested by VEJA is obsolete and scientifically flawed, having been compiled between 2000 and 2003 and never updated, and therefore cannot assist in protecting any current environmental rights.
  • Regarding the second request for records on the Vaal disposal site, AMSA argues that the site is no longer in operation and is undergoing closure and rehabilitation in consultation with government departments, rendering the records unnecessary for the exercise of a right.
  • The document highlights that the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA) provides specific legal channels for civil society involvement, such as reporting pollution or seeking court orders against the state, which AMSA argues are the appropriate remedies rather than PAIA requests to private bodies.

Cite the original document

APA
Centre for Environmental Rights (n.d.). amsa-sca-heads-e81b1214d39d94de.pdf. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AMSA-SCA-heads.pdf?x21779
Chicago
Centre for Environmental Rights. amsa-sca-heads-e81b1214d39d94de.pdf. n.d. https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AMSA-SCA-heads.pdf?x21779.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Centre for Environmental Rights |title=amsa-sca-heads-e81b1214d39d94de.pdf |url=https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AMSA-SCA-heads.pdf?x21779 |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{centreforenvironmentalrightsndamsascaheadse81b1214d39d94depdf, author = {{Centre for Environmental Rights}}, title = {{amsa-sca-heads-e81b1214d39d94de.pdf}}, institution = {Centre for Environmental Rights}, url = {https://cer.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/AMSA-SCA-heads.pdf?x21779}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated