Judges Matter -

Enter your keyword

Judge Gerald Hercules Bloem

  • Home
  • Judge Gerald Hercules Bloem
Judge G H Bloem_4693

Capacity: Judge
First appointed as a judge: June 2015 (Eastern Cape High Court)
Further Appointments: N/A
Gender: Male
Ethnicity: Coloured
Date of Birth: January 1960
Qualifications: BA (1980) Secondary Teachers Diploma (1981) (UWC), LLB (1986) (Rhodes University)

 

 

Key judgments 

 

Candidate Biography | Updated August 2026

Judge Gerald Bloem is a judge of the Eastern Cape Division, seated at the Makhanda High Court.

Judge Bloem is a Free State resident from Kroonstad. He holds a BA and Secondary Teachers Diploma from the University of Western Cape and an LLB degree from Rhodes University.

Judge Bloem, who started his career as a teacher, later attained senior counsel status in 2010, where he practised for about five years. In 2015, Bloem was appointed to the High Court in the Eastern Cape Division in Makhanda. To date, he has written over 250 judgments across his various judicial appointments.

In the Eastern Cape Division of the High Court, Judge Bloem has overseen matters related to both criminal and civil law. In Mlombo v Minister of Police, Bloem dealt with an unusual case in which he declared Mlombo’s detention unlawful because the detention warrant was not based on an order of court. Judge Bloem ruled that the plaintiff’s detention was unlawful because his detention warrant was executed, and he was detained despite the magistrate’s order that the plaintiff be released on warning after his first court appearance. The plaintiff was detained for 39 days in a shared cell until his court date to appear for the charge of malicious property damage. Judge Bloem awarded the plaintiff significant damages for his unlawful detention and established that the magistrate’s order on a plaintiff’s detention supersedes a detention warrant by the police.

In Sustaining the Wild Coast NPC v Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, a significantly important judgment for environmental law in South Africa, Judge Bloem granted an interim interdict to stop Shell from proceeding with a seismic survey without environmental authorisation being granted under the National Environmental Management Act. The case was brought by non-profit companies, natural persons, and a communal property association. Taking into consideration the relevant Sections 24, 30, and 31 of the South African Constitution, Judge Bloem determined that Shell’s consultation process was inadequate and substantially flawed for the communities affected by the seismic survey. This case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court where it has been consistently found that Shell was unlawfully granted the right of exploration.

Bloem has acted at the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) for four terms between December 2023 and November 2025. He has penned several judgments during his acting stints.

Both Zeal Health Innovations v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Twenty-Third Century Systems dealt with issues related to contract formation and reliance. In Zeal Health, Judge Bloem ruled that a contract made between the appellant and the Department of Defence and Military Veterans to serve military veterans was constitutionally invalid because the Acting Director-General of the Department committed funds that exceeded the Department’s annual budget. Since the Acting Director-General’s actions in forming the contract were unlawful, the contract itself and any subsequent payments were invalid. In Twenty-Third Century Systems, the appellant sued the respondent, a company that terminated a contract with Twenty-Third Century Systems, for loss of profit. Judge Bloem ruled that the termination was valid and that to rule otherwise would lead to “unbusinesslike results”.

In the field of criminal law, Bloem wrote the majority judgment in Ntuli v The State. Ntuli is centred on the state’s obligation to bring forward charges and establish evidence for all elements of a charge. The Regional Court convicted Ntuli on one count of kidnapping and four counts of rape and sentenced him to terms of imprisonment in respect of each count. On count 2, rape of a female aged 14 years, the regional court-imposed life imprisonment and gave leave to appeal only in respect of that sentence. The Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria (the High Court), held that the regional court had exceeded its sentencing jurisdiction, and it set aside the sentence and referred the matter to a single judge for sentence only in respect of count 2. Acting in terms of this, Mavundla J sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment and granted leave to appeal to the SCA, in respect of both conviction and sentence on all counts.

Notably, one issue the court had to consider was whether the reference in the charge sheet to Section 51(2), instead of Section 51(1), limited the minimum sentence that could be imposed to 10 years’ imprisonment. Bloem had to consider the state’s obligation to give meticulous consideration in the drafting of a charge sheet and the evidence needed to cover all the elements of an offence. He was not in agreement with the sentence of life imprisonment by the minority and pointed out that the state failed to prove one essential element, namely, that the complainant was under the age of 16 years when she was raped. The appellant could accordingly not be convicted of rape in terms of s 51(1). Since the appellant was convicted under s 51(2), it would be unfair to sentence him under s 51(1).

Outside of his official duties as a judge, Bloem is also the chairperson of the University Council of his alma mater, Rhodes University. He has also served as a member of the National Bar Examination Board since 2023. As a young attorney, he represented indigent people while at the Legal Resources Centre, which, for Bloem is one of his most significant contributions to the law and the pursuit of Justice.

Having previously sat, albeit unsuccessfully, before the JSC for appointment to the SCA. Judge Bloem has again, thrown his hat in the ring, this time hoping that the bell will indeed ring with him presiding in the SCA.

 

April 2026 JSC Interview

Following deliberations, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has decided that it will not recommend Judge Gerald Hercules Bloem for a position on the Supreme Court of Appeal. Judge Bloem’s interview was unsuccessful. He was not nominated for appointment.

October 2025 JSC Interview

Following deliberations, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has decided that it will not recommend any candidate for appointment for the vacancy at the Supreme Court of Appeal. Judge Gerald Hercules Bloem’s October 2025 interview for a position on the Supreme Court of Appeal was unsuccessful. He was not nominated for appointment.