Uys v Parow School Board; Arendse v Parow School Board

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: van Heerden AJ
• Judgment Date: 12 June 1964
• Citation: 1962 (3) SA 628 (C)
• Hearing Date: 12 June 1964
• Court: Cape Provincial Division

Van Heerden, A.J.:

There are two matters before me. In the one instance the applicant is one Abraham Uys and in the other instance the applicant is one James Arendse. In both applications the Parow School Board is cited as the respondent. In both applications an order

Van Heerden AJ

of Court is asked for, interdicting Mr. L. J. Claassens in his capacity as secretary to the respondent Board and the returning officer appointed by the said School Board from conducting the election of the school committee in respect of the Elsies River Preparatory School at 10th A Avenue, Elsies River, on the 14th June, 1962, at 3.30 p.m. and in respect of the Bishop Lavis High School, in Bishop Lavis Township, Elsies River, on the 13th June, 1962, at 3.30 p.m. In both instances an order is asked for directing the Parow School Board to arrange meetings for the election of school committees in the respective schools during B an evening after working hours or at such times when the persons entitled to vote will be afforded an opportunity to do so. There is also a prayer for costs.

Both matters were argued before me as one and I think I can conveniently deal with both of them at the same time.

Mr. Kies who appeared for both petitioners conceded that both meetings, C which were convened by the School Board for the requisite purposes, were properly convened as regards the formalities that have to be carried out by a board in convening such meetings. I am also satisfied from the papers that that had in fact been done. It would appear that in the past meetings for the election of school committees with regard to D not only these two schools but other schools in Coloured areas had been held in the evening and that the present arrangement to hold the meetings at 3.30 p.m. is a departure from the procedure which had hitherto been followed. Both applicants aver that it would be impossible for them, due to the fact that they work daily during that period in E which the meeting is to be held, to attend such meeting and that they would, therefore, not be afforded an opportunity of exercising their vote in the election of the members of the respective committees. In both instances it is also alleged that the wives of the respective applicants would for the same reason be unable to attend and to vote.

F Now it is clear to me that when notice was given of these meetings at 3.30 p.m. on the respective dates, certain persons were dissatisfied and that...