2001
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association versus The President of the Republic of South Africa and others.
On April 19, the much-publicised trial ended unexpectedly when the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, representing the multinational research-based pharmaceutical industry, unconditionally withdrew its legal action against South Africa’€™s Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act.

The Act allows for the setting up of a statutory Medicine Pricing Committee; a single exit price to be set for medicine sold in the private sector; and enabling the minister to ‘€œparallel import ‘€œ medicines that are needed in the public interest. All these measures combine to drive drug prices down.

Old Mutual versus ONSO
In 1998 the insurance giant employed a young woman (identified as ONSO in court papers) as a call operator but refused her membership of two benefit funds and the medical aid scheme after she had tested HIV positive.

By the time the case got to court, the employee had resigned and taken another job. Old Mutual wanted case dismissed on two technicalities i.e. that that the woman had left the company and that the benefit fund had to be brought to court instead of Old Mutual.

Both arguments were dismissed and the issue was referred to trial.

The judge’€™s in this case ruling meant that for the first time under the new Labour Relations Act, an individual was granted the ‘€œright to retain a remedy’€ for acts of unfair discrimination, even if she had left the job. Secondly, the judgement cleared the way for a major Labour Court trial that would seek to determine whether it is fair to automatically exclude employees with HIV from employee benefits.

2002
Treatment Action Campaign versus Minister of Health
Judge Chris Botha ruled in the Pretoria High Court that the Government was obliged to make Nevirapine available to pregnant women with HIV. He ordered that this be done immediately in health facilities where the capacity existed and where it was medically indicated. He added that the national and provincial governments were under a duty to plan effective programmes that progressively extended capacity and services to prevent mother to child transmission.

‘€˜A’€™ versus South African Airways
The case was brought by the Aids Law Project on behalf of a 30-year-old Gauteng man who had been refused employment by SAA. During the trial SAA admitted that the applicant, a man only known as ‘€œA’€ was qualified for the position that he had applied for. The airline further admitted that it had in fact intended to hire ‘€œA’€ before he tested positive in a compulsory pre-employment HIV test. It had declined to hire ‘€œA’€ as it claimed his HIV status would prevent him from receiving a Yellow Fever vaccination, which in turn would prevent him from being able to fly internationally.

Expert medical evidence contradicted this and the Aids Law Project was able to show that SAA had created a policy based on misinformation and generalisations about HIV. At the conclusion of the lengthy legal process, SAA was forced to publicly admit that its policy of excluding all persons with HIV, amounted to discrimination. SAA acknowledged the severity of the injuries ‘€œA’€ had sustained when it agreed to pay him R100 000 in damages as well as his legal costs.