What is in issue is whether the applications constitute an abuse of the process of the court which merits the making of an order that the costs of the applications be paid as between attorney and client. This is a significant and determinative difference. The first is whether it is unconstitutional for immigration law to facilitate the immigration into South Africa of the spouses of permanent South African residents but not to afford the same benefits to gays and lesbians in permanent same-sex life partnerships with permanent South African residents. In relation to the costs of the appeal as a whole, however, such costs will be comparatively slight. Any other conclusion would lead to the absurdity that the granting of a remedy would depend on the fortuitous circumstance of the form in which the legislature chose to enact the provision in question. They all have certain features in common. Most helpful customer reviews on Amazon.
Prime Video Verified Purchase.
Codependent Lesbian Space Alien Seeks Same
This omission in section 25 5 of the Act is therefore inconsistent with the Constitution. Write a customer review. It fondly spoofed the B movie science fiction movies of the 50s. It appears clearly from its motivation for the second option which it adopted that it aimed, through its order, to preserve the benefits of the section for spouses and was intent on giving an order to achieve this object. Permanent same-sex life partners are entitled to an effective remedy for the breach of their rights to equality and dignity.