{"id":{"repo_id":"cape-town","oai_identifier":"oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/4710"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cape-town/oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/4710","repository":{"repo_id":"cape-town","name":"University of Cape Town","base_url":"https://open.uct.ac.za/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"The burgeoning constitutional requirement of rationality and separation of powers has rationality review gone too far?","abstract":"This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in extending this baseline requirement to cover procedural fairness, reason-giving and something akin to proportionality, in the context of non-administrative action and in the absence of any meaningful engagement with the doctrine of separation of powers, the courts are going too far.","abstract_html":"This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in extending this baseline requirement to cover procedural fairness, reason-giving and something akin to proportionality, in the context of non-administrative action and in the absence of any meaningful engagement with the doctrine of separation of powers, the courts are going too far.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Kohn, Lauren Manon"],"institution":"Department of Public Law","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Corder, Hugh","De Vos, Pierre"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013","date_published":"2013","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:23:19Z","subjects":[],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4710","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Corder, Hugh","De Vos, Pierre"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Kohn, Lauren Manon"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-07-30T18:19:39Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-07-30T18:19:39Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2013"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["Department of Public Law"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Cape Town"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Master Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["LLM"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4710"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in extending this baseline requirement to cover procedural fairness, reason-giving and something akin to proportionality, in the context of non-administrative action and in the absence of any meaningful engagement with the doctrine of separation of powers, the courts are going too far."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The burgeoning constitutional requirement of rationality and separation of powers has rationality review gone too far?"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Corder, Hugh","De Vos, Pierre"],"dc:creator":["Kohn, Lauren Manon"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-07-30T18:19:39Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-07-30T18:19:39Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2013"],"dc:description.abstract":["This thesis presents an analysis of three recent judgments of our apex courts which collectively illustrate a maximising of the 'minimum threshold requirement' of rationality through the seemingly inexhaustible constitutional principle of legality. The question sought to be addressed is whether, in extending this baseline requirement to cover procedural fairness, reason-giving and something akin to proportionality, in the context of non-administrative action and in the absence of any meaningful engagement with the doctrine of separation of powers, the courts are going too far."],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4710"],"dc:language.iso":["eng"],"dc:publisher.department":["Department of Public Law"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Cape Town"],"dc:title":["The burgeoning constitutional requirement of rationality and separation of powers has rationality review gone too far?"],"dc:type":["Master Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["Masters"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["LLM"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:23:19Z"}