CHASKALSON CHASKALSON P / MADALA PJ private medical sector to CAPD treatment. No evidence was placed before us in that regard and there is nothing on the papers to show that patients treated privately do not receive proper advice in regard to the availability, risks and costs of such treatment. [36] The state has a constitutional duty to comply with the obligations imposed on it by section 27 of the Constitution. It has not been shown in the present case, however, that the state’s failure to provide renal dialysis facilities for all persons suffering from chronic renal failure constitutes a breach of those obligations. In the circumstances the appellant is not entitled to the relief that he seeks in these proceedings and his appeal against the decision of Combrinck J must fail. This is not an appropriate case for an order for costs to be made and the respondent correctly does not seek such an order. [37] The following order is made. The appeal against the order made by Combrinck J is dismissed. No order is made as to costs. Langa DP, Ackermann J, Didcott J, Goldstone J, Kriegler J, Mokgoro J, O’Regan J, and Sachs J concur in the judgment of Chaskalson P 20