Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Court rejects government’s effort to stop private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations

May 26, 2026

Online marketplace scams are becoming more sophisticated, warns fraud expert Ashwini Singh

May 26, 2026

Remembering the fearless activist who challenged power and inspired debate

May 25, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Court rejects government’s effort to stop private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations
  • Online marketplace scams are becoming more sophisticated, warns fraud expert Ashwini Singh
  • Remembering the fearless activist who challenged power and inspired debate
  • Attorney who continued practising after being struck off sees late appeal thrown out
  • SCA acquits man convicted of murdering key state witness
  • Children with disabilities experience barriers when trying to report abuse and seek support
  • Debt does not always disappear when you think it does, despite the three-year rule
  • SAHRC and JCPS Ministers launch talks on immigration tensions
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Court rejects government’s effort to stop private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations
Regulatory Law

Court rejects government’s effort to stop private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations

Farmers and livestock owners can now vaccinate their animals privately after the Pretoria High Court found no legal ban.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliMay 26, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
The Pretoria High Court found no clear legal prohibition on private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations in a case involving Minister of Agriculture John Steenhuisen. Picture: SABC News
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • Acting Judge CJ van der Westhuizen ruled that there is no clear legal prohibition on private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations.
  • Livestock owners can obtain and use lawfully imported or manufactured vaccines if they follow reporting and notification requirements.
  • The Minister of Agriculture and two senior officials were ordered to cover the costs of the application.

Farmers and livestock owners across South Africa have received permission to vaccinate their animals against Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) after the High Court in Pretoria ruled that the government had not identified any law prohibiting private vaccination programs.

This ruling follows an urgent application filed by Sakeliga NPC, Suider-Afrika Agri Inisiatief NPC, and Free State Agriculture against the Minister of Agriculture, the Director General of the Department of Agriculture, the Director of the Directorate of Animal Health, and several others involved in managing the FMD outbreak.

Acting Judge CJ van der Westhuizen provided interim relief that allows owners and managers of cloven-hoofed livestock to obtain and administer lawfully imported or manufactured vaccines while a larger legal challenge is ongoing.

The applicants approached the court after the government stated that vaccinations against FMD should only occur through state-controlled processes. They argued that this position lacked legal support and hindered efforts to control the disease during outbreaks that impacted farming communities and the agricultural sector.

The applicants believed that private vaccination would support, rather than replace, government disease control efforts. They informed the court that vaccines could be obtained through legal channels, and livestock owners were willing to follow all necessary regulations regarding their use.

No legislation was identified banning private vaccination

Judge Van der Westhuizen reviewed the Animal Diseases Act, relevant regulations, and other measures cited by the respondents. He concluded that none of the provisions cited by the government created a clear ban on private vaccination against FMD.

The judge stressed that South African law typically allows actions unless specifically prohibited by legislation or lawful regulation.

Referring to one of the documents used by the government, Judge Van der Westhuizen noted, "It has not been published in the Government Gazette and is clearly marked as a 'secret' document."

The court also dismissed the argument that a recently published vaccination scheme prevented private vaccination. Judge Van der Westhuizen found that participating in the scheme was voluntary and did not create the prohibited status claimed by the respondents.

"The controversial new scheme does not provide for any 'controlled purpose or for the improvement of animal health'," the judge stated.

The judgment indicated that if the government wanted to prohibit private vaccination, it would need to do so through a lawful measure authorised by legislation.

Court says private vaccination could help contain disease

The court recognised that the ongoing spread of FMD created an urgent situation, and any delay in accessing vaccines could lead to serious consequences for livestock owners.

"The risk of irreparable harm exists when FMD spreads rapidly outside the designated controlled areas," Judge Van der Westhuizen said.

In weighing the convenience, the court concluded that allowing private vaccination would not hinder government efforts to manage the outbreak. Instead, it could help authorities limit the spread of the disease.

"The interim relief would not negatively affect the respondents in fulfilling their obligations to contain FMD. On the contrary, it would aid them in fighting FMD," the judge noted.

The court ultimately decided that the applicants had established a preliminary right to relief and had shown reasonable chances of success in the proceedings that will finally resolve the matter.

Strict conditions remain in place

While granting relief, the court set several requirements. Livestock owners intending to vaccinate animals must inform veterinary authorities at least five days before the vaccination.

The notice must include details about the vaccination program's location, the number and type of animals, the identity of the person administering the vaccine, and the measures to maintain the vaccine cold chain.

Within 14 days of vaccination, owners must submit sworn declarations confirming compliance with relevant regulations and providing details about the vaccine used, dosage given, storage conditions, and the animals vaccinated.

This order does not change existing movement restrictions or reporting obligations related to suspected FMD outbreaks. It also does not allow anyone to manufacture or import vaccines without obtaining the necessary legal approvals.

Judge Van der Westhuizen instructed the applicants to file for final relief within 20 days and ordered the Minister of Agriculture, the Director General of the Department of Agriculture, and the Director of the Directorate of Animal Health to pay the costs of the application, including the expenses for two counsel if hired.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

Agriculture Foot and Mouth Disease Livestock farming Pretoria High Court Sakeliga
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

Attorney who continued practising after being struck off sees late appeal thrown out

May 25, 2026

Discovery financial rep who emailed client data to husband remains barred from industry

May 24, 2026

Watchdog busts Mia & Leah Cape Town for faking local ties and delivery deals

May 23, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 1   +   1   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024

Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

June 2, 2025
Don't Miss
Regulatory Law
4 Mins Read

Court rejects government’s effort to stop private Foot and Mouth Disease vaccinations

By Kennedy MudzuliMay 26, 20264 Mins Read

The Pretoria High Court has ruled that livestock owners may privately vaccinate animals against Foot and Mouth Disease, finding no clear legal prohibition on the practice while a broader challenge to government’s position continues.

Online marketplace scams are becoming more sophisticated, warns fraud expert Ashwini Singh

May 26, 2026

Remembering the fearless activist who challenged power and inspired debate

May 25, 2026

Attorney who continued practising after being struck off sees late appeal thrown out

May 25, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
OUR PICKS

Children with disabilities experience barriers when trying to report abuse and seek support

May 25, 2026

Judge warns body corporate levy lawsuits may be abuse of court process

March 16, 2026

New eviction ruling says people living in tents can have protection against eviction

May 21, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
►
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
►
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
►
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
►
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
►
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by