Historic judgment in SRD grant court case stands to benefit half of South Africas population

The North Gauteng High Court ruled in favor of the Institute for Economic Justice (IEJ) and #PayTheGrants, finding that the South African government's administration of the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant was unconstitutional. The court determined that the grant is not a temporary measure and that the government used 'ulterior' motives to exclude eligible applicants through restrictive regulations, such as a solely online application process and inaccurate database checks. The judgment requires the government to allow in-person applications, redefine 'insufficient means' to exclude irregular monetary inflows, and develop a plan within four months to increase the grant's value and means-test threshold in line with the cost of living. Additionally, the court struck down budget caps that limited the number of beneficiaries and ordered SASSA to rectify payment delays affecting 10-15% of successful applicants.

• The North Gauteng High Court ruled that the Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant is not a temporary measure but has the same legal status as other social grants provided under the Social Assistance Act (SAA).
• The court found that the exclusively online application process for the SRD grant is irrational and illegal, as it excludes the approximately 22% of the population without internet access. The government is now ordered to allow in-person applications at SASSA offices.
• The judgment declares that the government's use of automated bank verification and out-of-date government databases (including UIF, NSFAS, and SARS IRP5) to exclude applicants is unreasonable, unfair, and unconstitutional.
• The court ruled that the definition of 'insufficient means' must be narrowed to refer only to regular payments the recipient is legally entitled to, rejecting the inclusion of ad hoc assistance or money held for others.
• The court struck down regulations allowing the government to stop payments once an arbitrary budget cap set by National Treasury is reached, noting that the government budgeted for 10.5 million people despite acknowledging 18.3 million were in need.
• The government is ordered to create a plan within four months to progressively increase the value of the grant (currently R370) and the means-test threshold (currently R624) to align with the official food poverty line (R796) and cost of living.
• SASSA must investigate and resolve payment delays that affect 10-15% of successful applicants each month, providing a rectification plan within four months.

APA

Institute for Economic Justice (2025). Historic judgment in SRD grant court case stands to benefit half of South Africas population. https://iej.org.za/press-room/statements/statement-historic-judgment-in-srd-grant-court-case-stands-to-benefit-half-of-south-africas-population/

Chicago

Institute for Economic Justice. Historic judgment in SRD grant court case stands to benefit half of South Africas population. 2025. https://iej.org.za/press-room/statements/statement-historic-judgment-in-srd-grant-court-case-stands-to-benefit-half-of-south-africas-population/.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Institute for Economic Justice |title=Historic judgment in SRD grant court case stands to benefit half of South Africas population |date=24 January 2025 |url=https://iej.org.za/press-room/statements/statement-historic-judgment-in-srd-grant-court-case-stands-to-benefit-half-of-south-africas-population/ |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{instituteforeconomicjustice2025historic, author = {{Institute for Economic Justice}}, title = {{Historic judgment in SRD grant court case stands to benefit half of South Africas population}}, publisher = {Institute for Economic Justice}, year = {2025}, month = jan, url = {https://iej.org.za/press-room/statements/statement-historic-judgment-in-srd-grant-court-case-stands-to-benefit-half-of-south-africas-population/}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }