Crazy.
I walk my dog by a small out of the way beach in Vermont and it was quite busy this week. Kids on dinghy’s and searching the rock pools etc. How can this be prohibited when the malls are still open?
The logic does seem to be failing because there's more risk of catching the virus indoors for obvious reasons.Crazy.
I walk my dog by a small out of the way beach in Vermont and it was quite busy this week. Kids on dinghy’s and searching the rock pools etc. How can this be prohibited when the malls are still open?
The tobacco case going on appeal has really mixed things up. I am no legal expert but I am pretty sure the judgement hits pause whilst there is an appeal active.
@GreGorGy what are your thoughts?
I have stock for until March but do think I should go shopping tomorrow morning.
Maintain adjusted level 3.
Indoor & outdoor gatherings not permitted. Excl funerals, restaurants, museums, gyms.
Curfew 9pm - 5am.
Masks mandated.
No alcohol sales.
How is alcohol getting through the borders now? Liquor prices going to go through the roof.It does seem that sanity has prevailed and CR does look calmer than he did last time.
The border closing sounds strange to me considering the exclusions. Sounds to me like business as usual.
Probably the same way it has always got through, although perhaps the "customs duty" has increased.How is alcohol getting through the borders now? Liquor prices going to go through the roof.
Also IANAL...A judgement can be in part or completely suspended with an appeal (also, IANAL but maybe @Paul Hjul could weigh in here). They have two things against them: The unconstitutional ruling (although they have appealed) and the more important public consultation settlement. When they settled outside of court, they agreed to be bound by those conditions. Reneging would open them up to a world of hurt and instant expenses. And I suspect the legality of it would come into question: Their failure to abide by their own agreed conditions would make the continued sale legal, despite any emergency ruling to the contrary.
But these are red herrings: I suspect we have an appeal to protect the pride of an obviously ignorant minister who seems to be taking it personally. So let's waste very limited government funds on an appeal. That is a real slap in the face of every South African who has yet to receive a relief grant. And that is just the start of the utter disrespect the government currently has for its own citizens. It is disgusting.
What I have a problem with is the fact that this decision is being used as a smokescreen.
Good thing I moved away from Betty's bayOverstrand active cases (Kleinmond, Hermanus, Stanford and Gansbaai)
27 Nov 41
29 Nov 64
7 Dec 98
9 Dec 122
11 Dec 138
14 Dec 207
17 Dec 287
18 Dec 314
21 Dec 376
23 Dec 481
24 Dec 559
28 Dec 661
30 Dec 623
31 Dec 748
4 Jan 733
6 Jan 678
8 Jan 734
11 Jan 507
Tourists have gone home?