Judges Matter -

Enter your keyword

Judge L Windell

Judge L Windell 3607

Capacity: Judge
First appointed as judge: July 2013 (Gauteng High Court)
Gender: Female
Ethnicity: White
Date of Birth: December 1967
Qualifications: B.Iuris (1989)(NWU), LLB (1994)(Unisa)

Key Judgments:

Candidate Biography | Updated February 2026: 

Judge Leonie Windell is a judge of the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg.

Judge Leonie Windell’s judicial career challenges common assumptions about the transition from prosecutor to magistrate to superior court judge. She holds the rare distinction of being the only judge to have presided over two complex class action cases, an area that remains relatively novel in South African law.

Judge Windell’s career includes presiding over Various Parties v Anglo American (“the Kabwe case”), one of South Africa’s most complex class action matters. The case involved parents of child victims of lead poisoning seeking compensation from Anglo American for its mining operations in Zambia’s Kabwe district between 1906 and 1994.

Lead, widely used in paint, fuel, plumbing, and ammunition, is highly toxic—particularly to children—and can cause brain damage or even death. Kabwe has the highest recorded incidence of lead poisoning in children under three years old worldwide. The 11 applicants, all raised in Kabwe, had elevated lead levels and sought to hold Anglo American accountable.

Judge Windell was tasked with determining whether sufficient evidence existed to show that all victims were affected by the same exposure from Anglo’s Kabwe mine, thereby justifying certification of a class. Beyond the scientific and medical data, the case presented jurisdictional challenges: Zambian citizens suing a South African company in South African courts, for events in Zambia spanning nearly five decades, applying both Zambian substantive law and South African procedural law.

After reviewing the evidence and legal framework, Judge Windell found that while the claimants had standing to bring the action, the evidence was insufficient to certify the class. She dismissed the claim on that basis and further held that a trial based on the facts presented would be unmanageable. She said:

“An unmanageable class action is one that would take an extremely long time to be completed, if it is completed at all. The applicants effectively concede unmanageability. The applicants claim in argument that it would take ten years for their legal team merely to take instructions from every member of the proposed classes. If this is so, it would take much longer for a South African court to assess the claim of each class member in the second stage. It bears emphasis that an unmanageable class action is not only adverse to Anglo’s interests: It undermines the applicants’ access to justice.” Windell’s judgment drew both praise (mainly from corporations) and criticism (mainly from activists) from around the world. The applicants have sworn to appeal it.

Windell has previously sat as one of three judges in the so-called silicosis class action case, Nkala v Harmony Gold. In that case, dozens of mineworkers sued several large mining companies (including Anglo American) for infecting them with silicosis (a form of tuberculosis arising from inhaling crystalline silica dust that sticks to the lungs) in mining operations since 1925.

Although the full bench certified the class and authorised the class action trial, Judge Windell dissented on one specific point: the transmissibility of claims. She held that under South African common law, claims for physical damages—such as pain and suffering, disablement, or reduced life expectancy—cannot be transferred before the close of pleadings. In her view, the majority judgment had not provided sufficient justification to develop the common law to permit such a transfer.

However, Windell found that in the limited circumstances of a class action of this nature, and considering the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights, transmissibility of claims should be allowed.  This means that, unlike the majority judgment, which allowed for transmissibility of claims in all cases, Windell found that the claims by deceased mineworkers for physical damage from silicosis could be transferred to their children, who would proceed with the class action. An appeal against the judgment was dismissed by the SCA on technical grounds.

Born in Lady Frere in the Eastern Cape, Windell graduated with a B.Iuris law degree from the North West University (then the Potchefstroom Universiteit vir Christienlike Hoer Ondervys) in 1989.

She then immediately started her legal career as a district and regional court prosecutor. She would continue in that role for the next four years, while also doing her LLB law degree part-time through Unisa, which she obtained in 1994.

Windell was then elevated to the bench as a district magistrate from November 1993, trying mainly criminal cases for 2 years and civil cases thereafter. She would stay in that role for the next 20 years until her appointment as a judge of the High Court in Johannesburg in 2013.

As a judge, Windell has delivered over 400 judgments (with over 11 reported) on areas such as tax law, family law, equality law, constitutional law, civil procedure and some criminal law. Of the ten judgments of hers that have gone on appeal, only 5 managed to successfully overturn her decisions.

Windell has acted as a judge of the Supreme Court of Appeal for four terms between 2022 and 2025. While at the SCA, she penned the judgments of Commissioner: SARS v Airports Company South Africa, a major tax judgment concerning the amendment of an objection filed against an additional tax assessment. ACSA had objected to SARS’s assessment decision not to allow a tax deduction as corporate social investment (CSI), and sought to amend its objection, except the tax court rules did not allow it, and thus had to rely on the uniform rules of court. The Tax Court found this to be permissible, ruling in favour of ACSA. On appeal to the SCA by SARS, Windell analysed the architecture of the tax dispute resolution system and found that the uniform rules of court do not permit such an amendment to an objection and upheld the appeal. The judgment was reported in the law reports and received wide support from the tax community.

Windell was one of the first cohorts of magistrates to receive social context training from the Law, Race and Gender Unit at the University of Cape Town in 1998. She completed several training programmes on topics such as advancing equality in terms of the new Bill of Rights, social context in judicial decision-making, and judicial skills for efficiency.  After undergoing SAJEI’s aspirant judges course and mentorship between 2010 and 2011, she served as an acting judge for several terms until her permanent appointment in 2013. She has since gone on to be a training and mentorship specialist in her own right.

Judge Windell lectured candidate attorneys on the LEAD vocational court in 2006, 2008, and 2013, lectured magistrates and new judges on the SAJEI on various topics of trial and motion work in both civil contexts and served as an official trainer in the Aspirant Judges course in 2023.

A member of the SA Chapter of the International Association of Women Judges since 2009, Judge Windell served as the provincial co-ordinator for North West (2010-2013), for Gauteng (2015 – 2018), and assistant vice president: publications (2017 – 2018). She has been an active member of SAC-IAWJ’s mentorship programme for women students and new graduates.

If appointed to the Supreme Court of Appeal, Judge Windell will only be the third magistrate to be permanently appointed in that court’s 114-year history. This will be Judge Windell’s fourth interview for a vacancy at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

 

April 2026 Interview:

After deliberations, the Judicial Service Commission has resolved to recommend Judge Leonie Windell for appointment to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

October 2025 SCA Interview:

October 2025 SCA Interview Synopsis:

The general mood in the room was collegiate and encouraging, even though Judge Windell admitted to being nervous. The Chief Justice apologised for the two-hour delay in starting and reassured the candidate that she was in good hands. Commissioners expressed admiration for her staggering figure of 440 judgments produced in the high court and her ongoing passion for mentoring young women in the legal profession.

Two interesting moments highlighted her judicial philosophy and her candour regarding difficult cases. First, she was commended for her judgment in the Peter case, where her starting point was the constitutional purpose behind the statute to protect vulnerable occupiers. She described how the judges engaged in vigorous debates and managed to overcome a split decision to produce a single judgment. Second, when questioned about a cost order in the Kabwe class action, Windell admitted she could not remember her specific reasoning at that moment. She described the matter as a very difficult judgment that felt like a baby she struggled to bring out while lying in her backyard looking at the stars at midnight.

The issue of her experience at the SCA, which was a point of concern in her previous interview, played out positively as she has since completed four terms as an acting judge. She noted that she now feels she has found her place at the court and finds the environment conducive to her work ethic. Additionally, the GCB’s observation that she has quietly developed the common law to aid vulnerable groups was noted as a fulfilment of constitutional promises. The factor that likely led to her recommendation was her high productivity and proven ability to handle complex matters at the appellate level while maintaining a commitment to mentoring and transformation.

 

 

October 2024 SCA Interview:

October 2024 SCA Interview Synopsis:

Judge Windell returned for the second time in 2024 for a vacancy at the SCA. When CJ Maya asked about how many judgments she had handed down it was made clear that Judge Windell is a very effective judge having handed down 409 judgments in the High Court with none outstanding. “Well I know for myself that you are a very hard working person, you are a workaholic. You are notorious for that.” commented CJ Maya.

In her 24 minute interview few questions were posed to Judge Windell. The only comments that could possibly be perceived to be negative were whether she had sufficient experience due to her only having acted three terms in the SCA commented Zondi. This is not surprising, a lack of acting experience is a concern that is notoriously raised and goes against the suitability of candidates.

Having been exposed to a variety of different matter including tax and class action matter in her career that includes 30 years of experience as a presiding officer, she informed Commissioner Mmoiemang that she would bring great experience if she were to be appointed to the SCA.

Commissioner Lekganyane asked about her sense of understanding of the plight of the communities in the mining areas and how as South Africa we could take socio-economic measures. She responded by that these are tasks for the legislator but she has not properly had a chance to consider this question.

Judge Windell was ultimately unsuccessful. 

SCA Interview | May 2024

In May 2024 Judge Windell was interviewed by the JSC for a position on the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Judge Windell’s interview went well. In explaining her experience of her acting stints at the SCA, she compared it to moving to Johannesburg for the first time. She felt privileged and eager to prove that she deserved to be there. She found it intellectually challenging, and loved the experience. She “loved” the fact that everyone there was from different provinces, yet working hard. She said it was an environment where you could ask questions, and people helped each other. She said she had made life-long friends from that appointment.
Judge Windells interview was unsuccessful