Capacity: Regional Magistrate
First Appointed as Regional Magistrate: September 2016 (Durban Magistrates’ Court)
Gender: Female
Ethnicity: Coloured
Date of Birth: December 1969
Qualifications: B.Proc (1992) LLM (International Family Law and Children’s Rights) (2013) (UWC
Candidate biography (Updated September 2024)
Ms Pearl Andrews currently sits as a regional magistrate of the Durban Magistrates’ Court, having been appointed in October 2019.
She began her legal career as a candidate attorney at Z Abdurahman & Associates in 1992, and after being admitted as an attorney went on to practice as such until 2002. She was appointed as an additional magistrate in the Wynberg Magistrates’ Court in 2004, and served as such until 2010, also serving as a Children’s Court commissioner on an ad hoc basis, and as presiding officer of the Wynberg Equality Court.
Ms Andrews was then elevated to senior magistrate of the Mitchells Plain Magistrates’ Court in 2013 until 2016, during which time she also acted as a regional magistrate and chief magistrate, before being appointed as regional magistrate of the Durban Magistrates’ Court in September 2016, where she currently sits. She further served as the acting regional court president in KwaZulu-Natal during 2023, and has served as an acting judge of the Western Cape Division of the High Court for 7 terms, most recent of which came between April and June 2024.
Having qualified from UWC with her B.Proc in 1992, and later with her LLM in International Family Law and Children’s Rights in 2013, she has embarked on and undertaken various forms of judicial development and training. As acting regional court president of KwaZulu-Natal she was tasked with various duties, including overall judicial management, allocation of cases, evaluation of judicial statistical data, mentoring and evaluating aspirant regional magistrates, an adjudicating criminal and civil cases.
Ms Andrews has been a dedicated member of the South African Chapter of International Association of Women Judges (SAC-IAWJ) for many years, serving as the provincial coordinator of KwaZulu-Natal from August 2021 until August 2023. In this role, she demonstrated exceptional leadership, fostering a welcoming and collegial environment. Her tenure as an acting judge of the Western Cape Division of the High Court has produced several notable judgments, with six having been reported, and two having been considered by the Constitutional Court. It appears that none of her judgments have been successfully appealed.
One of Ms Andrews’ most notable judgments, delivered whilst she was acting in the Western Cape Division of the High Court, is the matter of Telkom SA SOC Ltd v City of Cape Town. In this matter, the applicants sought a declarator that the provisions of the City of Cape Town’s Municipal Planning By-laws 2015 (“By-law”), Zoning Scheme Regulations and Telecommunications Mast Infrastructure Policy (Policy no. 40544) (“Mast Policy”), were in conflict with the provisions of Section 22 of the Electronic Communications Act 36 of 2005 (“ECA”) and were accordingly invalid. In the alternative, the applicants sought a declarator that the By-law, the City of Cape Town Zoning Scheme Regulation and the Mast Policy were declared unconstitutional and invalid insofar as they required the Respondent’s consent for the erection of any telecommunications infrastructure in its area of jurisdiction. In a counter-application, the respondent sought a declarator that the first applicant’s erection and use of the mast on the property of the second applicant were unlawful for want of planning authorisation and building plan approval.
In dismissing the application, Andrews held that various Constitutional Court authorities had firmly established that municipalities’ constitutional legislative power regarding “municipal planning” included the control of zoning, even in respect of a use of land, such as for telecommunications, which fell within the exclusive authority of national government. The conclusion was that the By-law did not conflict with Section 22 of the ECA. In keeping with the Constitutional Court’s findings, it was overtly clear that a municipality must regulate land use, including matters which affected national interests. Andrews thus found that the respondent had the exclusive legislative competence to regulate zoning of all land in its area for all purposes, regardless of whether the purpose affected a national interest. Consequently, the respondent had the constitutional power and right to regulate the zoning of land to determine whether it may be used for masts. She thus found that the By-law was valid and that the zoning of land for the use of masts fell within the respondent’s competence of “municipal planning”. This matter was appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal, with the appeal dismissed. Leave to appeal was subsequently refused by the Constitutional Court on 25 June 2020.
Despite her unsuccessful interview in October 2021, and the concerns raised therein, she has since served 3 more terms as an acting judge of the Western Cape Division of the High Court. Barring any concerns similar to those raised in her 2021 interview, it may be that her relative shortage of reported judgments counts against her this time around.
October 2024 Interview:
October 2021 JSC Interview
October 2021 JSC Interview Synopsis:
Ms Andrews’ interview by the JSC in October 2021 for a position on the Western Cape Division of the High Court was unsuccessful.
A crucial subject in her interview, which might have been a factor in her non-appointment, related to how she left one of her terms as acting judge of the Western Cape Division of the High Court. The Judge President raised the fact that he had allocated a matter to Andrews involving the DA and ANC, and that Andrews had enrolled the matter and ruled in favour of the DA. Of issue was the fact that Andews did not disclose to the Judge President that her cousin was a high ranking member the DA, and did not return the matter to the Judge President on account of a conflict of interest.
In response to this concern, Andrews stated that she was unaware at the time that the matter had any bearing on her cousin, due to the fact that the parties were cited in the matter in their individual capacities, and as such the matter did not appear to her to be an overtly political matter between the DA and ANC.
