Capacity: Judge
Further appointments: N/A
First appointed as a judge: 01-06-2015
Date of Birth: January 1960
Qualifications: BA (1980) (UWC), Secondary Teachers Diploma (1981) (UWC), LLB (1986) (Rhodes),
Ethnicity : White
Gender: Male
Key judgments:
- Twenty-Third Century Systems (Pty) Ltd and Another v SAP Africa Region (Pty) Ltd (172/2023) [2025] ZASCA 51; [2025] 3 All SA 62 (SCA) (30 April 2025)
- Zeal Health Innovations (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans and Another (967/2023) [2024] ZASCA 183 (27 December 2024)
- Manelis v Manelis (Case no 1235/22) [2025] ZASCA 55 (9 May 2025)
- Mlombo v Minister of Police (190/2022) [2023] ZAECBHC 22 (8 August 2023)
- Godfrey Alfred Ntuli v S (20730/2014) [2025] ZASCA 53; 2025 (2) SACR 157 (SCA) (9 May 2025)
Candidate Bio:
Judge Gerald Bloem is a Free Statetor who hails from Kroonstad. He holds a BA and Secondary Teachers Diploma from the University of Western Cape and an LLB degree from Rhodes.
Bloem, who started his career as a Teacher, later attained silk status (senior counsel) in 2010 where he practiced for about five years until his appointment as a judge of the Eastern Cape High Court in Makhanda.
In Mlombo v Minister of Police Bloem had to deal with an unusual case where he declared the detention of Mlombo unlawful because the warrant of detention was not based on an order of court. This judgment is significant in establishing that where a person is detained by virtue of a warrant of detention, it is not that warrant but the order of the court that is the basis for this detention. The warrant of detention was issued by the police officer despite the order of the magistrate ordering that he should be released on warning after his first court appearance.
Bloem has acted at the SCA for three terms between December 2023 and March 2025. He has penned several judgments during his acting stint. In Steyn v Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy he reviewed and set aside the Ministers Petroleum regulations on the basis that he was not empowered to do so.
In Zeal Health Innovations v Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Bloem wrote about the powers of the Court to consider a just and equitable remedy after a contract has been declared constitutionally invalid. The validity of the appointment of Zeal Health Innovations by the Acting Director General was also under scrutiny. Bloem found that the Acting Director General committed a liability because the contract price did not fall within the purview of the department’s budget when it was awarded.
Writing in the field of criminal law, Bloem wrote the majority judgment in Ntuli v The State. There, 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), Ismail J and Hassim AJ, 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 of the issues which the court had to consider was whether the reference in the charge sheet to s 51(2) instead of s 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 be adduced 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 the provisions of s 51(2), it would be unfair to sentence him under the provisions of 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.
As a young attorney, he represented indigent people while at the Legal Resources Centre. This, for Bloem, is one of his most significant contributions to the law and the pursuit of Justice.
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.