|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| March 2023 |
|
|
A settlement agreement paying arrear salary without reserving interest or costs bars subsequent claims for those heads.
Compromise/Settlement agreement – effect as a contract – extinguishes cause of action (res judicata) unless rights reserved; Settlement negotiations – when silence in agreement implies compromise of ancillary claims (interest and costs); Review of court a quo – error in awarding interest after parties reached settlement; Costs – refusal to allow costs of two counsel where matter not complex.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: the applicant failed to show reasonable prospects; alleged defects were merits issues, not reviewable irregularities.
• Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – section 17 Superior Courts Act – reasonable prospects of success test as developed by SCA.
• Judicial review v appeal – distinction between attacking result (appeal) and method (review); application to criminal proceedings.
• Interim review of unterminated proceedings – scope of court’s power under section 22 of the Superior Courts Act.
• Criminal procedure – sufficiency of charge sheet and particulars; requirements to inform accused of actus reus and enable defence.
• Requirements for establishing gross irregularity or other compelling reasons to justify in medias res intervention.
|
9 March 2023 |
|
The court dismissed an application to remove trustees of an employee trust, finding no basis for automatic disqualification under the Trust Deed.
Trust law – Trust deed interpretation – qualification and removal of beneficiaries and trustees – Section 20 Trust Property Control Act – automatic disqualification – locus standi in related litigation.
|
7 March 2023 |
| February 2023 |
|
|
Applicant entitled to further particulars about respondent’s finances and trust assets; accrual may be litigated within the divorce action.
Family law – Divorce and accrual – Accrual vests on dissolution but may be claimed and quantified in same action; rule 21(2) particulars – relevance of trust and financial particulars pre-divorce – duty of full and frank disclosure.
|
28 February 2023 |
|
Police lawfully arrested the plaintiff under s40(1)(h) CPA based on reasonable suspicion from discovered marijuana and flight.
Criminal procedure – Arrest without warrant – s40(1)(h) CPA – reasonable suspicion must be objectively sustainable based on specific and articulable facts (discovery of suspected drugs and flight); police discretion to arrest; onus on police to justify deprivation of liberty; credibility and probabilities in civil factual disputes; costs — two counsel not allowed where not reasonably necessary.
|
28 February 2023 |
|
Insufficient pleadings and evidence, and absence of undue benefit or substantial misconduct, justify refusal to order forfeiture under s9(1).
Divorce Act s9(1) – forfeiture of patrimonial benefits; two‑stage enquiry (benefit and undue benefit) per Wijker; evidentiary burden to prove nature and value of benefits; factors: duration of marriage, circumstances of breakdown, substantial misconduct; pleadings must properly plead and quantify relief sought.
|
24 February 2023 |
|
Disconnecting electricity at the registered owner’s request was contractual, not administrative action, so interim relief was refused.
Administrative law – PAJA and s 33 – distinction between contractual exercise of power by an organ of state and administrative action – municipality disconnecting electricity at account-holder’s instruction not administrative action; non-joinder where water disconnect attributed to district municipality; interim interdict requiring prima facie right and prospects of success.
|
23 February 2023 |
|
Whether the respondent proved lawful ownership and innocent-owner status to resist forfeiture under POCA.
Prevention of Organised Crime Act (POCA) -- civil forfeiture of property used as instrumentality of crime; innocent owner exclusion (s54(8A)); locus standi under s39(3); proportionality in confiscation; costs and s57(5) funding of forfeiture-related expenses.
|
21 February 2023 |
|
Applicant failed to prove a material change or make full financial disclosure to warrant variation of maintenance pendente lite.
Family law – Maintenance pendente lite – Application to vary Rule 43 order under Rule 43(6) – Requirement of material change in circumstances; full and frank financial disclosure; credibility of alleged loss of income; impact of child attaining majority on maintenance obligations.
|
16 February 2023 |
|
Appellants unlawfully detained from 14:00 on 25 July to 12:00 on 27 July; each awarded R60,000 in damages.
Administrative detention and processing – lawfulness and duration – detention for processing of multiple arrested persons under Covid-19 measures.* Unlawful deprivation of liberty – when detention becomes unlawful and foreseeability of court attendance.* Quantum of damages for unlawful arrest/detention – appellate interference where trial court misdirected and awards strikingly disparate.* Costs – discretionary orders in respect of abandoned claims not lightly interfered with on appeal.
|
8 February 2023 |
|
The appellate court increased the applicant’s general damages for humiliating unlawful arrest and detention from R10,000 to R30,000.
Unlawful arrest and detention – assessment of general damages – appellate interference where trial court misdirected or award palpably inadequate – importance of surrounding circumstances (public humiliation, arrest in pyjamas, filthy cells) – Rule 34 offers must be on record to be considered for costs.
|
7 February 2023 |
|
Ambiguous pre‑trial admission of drought insufficient to extinguish obligations; leave to appeal refused; counsel criticised for intemperate conduct.
Contract — Alleged vis major: ambiguous pre‑trial admission of drought does not, without clear evidence, amount to an admission that obligations were extinguished; divisibility and foreseeability arguments depend on finding objective impossibility; intemperate conduct by counsel may attract criticism and submissions for personal costs.
|
7 February 2023 |
|
Employee acted under superiors’ instructions and did not personally set the disciplinary prosecution in motion, so malicious prosecution claim failed.
Delict — malicious prosecution — requirement that defendant set the law in motion; vicarious liability where employee acts within course and scope of employment; distinction between initiating authority and subordinate acting under instruction; causation in malicious prosecution claims.
|
7 February 2023 |
|
Leave to appeal granted on quantum and costs where quantum was sustained but the court misdirected itself in exercising its costs discretion.
• Civil damages – assessment of general damages – discretion in quantum; globular awards may include contumelia.
• Contumelia – may be incorporated in a single solatium award rather than made separately.
• Costs – exercise of judicial discretion; seriousness of rights violations, public interest and witness conduct relevant to scale.
• Leave to appeal – Superior Courts Act s 17(1) (higher threshold); s 16(2)(a) (exceptional circumstances for costs appeals).
• Appeal practice – appellate deference to trial court’s factual findings; new evidence/authorities not adduced at trial weakens prospects of appeal.
|
6 February 2023 |
|
Forensic evidence linking a device to the respondent's home justified confirming rei vindicatio and rejecting an implausible theft claim.
Property — rei vindicatio — ownership established; possession at time of demand — forensic evidence showing device usage near respondent's residence and connection to home Wi‑Fi; disputes of fact on affidavit — bald, implausible allegations insufficient; court may reject improbable versions and decide on papers.
|
2 February 2023 |
|
Tender awards set aside because the procuring department unlawfully relaxed mandatory UIF certificate requirement and had no power to condone non-compliance.
Administrative law; Procurement law; PPPFA and "acceptable tender" threshold; Mandatory tender requirements (UIF certificate) — no discretion to condone; PAJA review; Doctrine of legality; Remedy — set aside awards and remit to re-tender.
|
2 February 2023 |
| January 2023 |
|
|
The applicant's leave to appeal was refused: the agreement was not an incidental credit agreement under the NCA.
Civil procedure — application for leave to appeal; Contract interpretation — whether deferred payment agreement is an incidental credit agreement under the National Credit Act; Evidentiary weight — Rule 37 admission, handwritten Annexure and oral evidence on interest; No reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
|
31 January 2023 |
|
Trust’s challenge to the sale, veil-piercing and bond cancellation dismissed; procedural defects and factual/legal insufficiency fatal.
• Insolvency Act s31 — challenge to collusive dispositions before sequestration; limits of relief (no automatic retransfer). • Companies Act s20(9) — piercing/juristic personality: requirement of clear primary facts and unconscionable abuse. • Winding-up/vested rights — concursus creditorum and effect on post-commencement dispositions. • Plascon-Evans approach to resolving disputed factual allegations in motion proceedings. • Validity of registered transfer and mortgage bond — formalities and protection of bona fide secured creditors. • Joint trusteeship — necessity of joinder/authority for institution of proceedings.
|
26 January 2023 |
|
Hand-in-pocket conduct can sustain robbery but may not establish threat to inflict grievous bodily harm.
Criminal law – Robbery – elements: theft through violence or threats of immediate personal violence – threat may be by conduct or words. Aggravating circumstances – s 2(1)(b) CPA – threat to inflict grievous bodily harm must be established objectively; subjective fear alone may suffice for robbery but not necessarily for aggravating circumstance. Appeal/review – court may set aside wrongly qualified conviction and substitute appropriate conviction and sentence. Minimum Sentences Act – not applicable where aggravating circumstance not proved.
|
25 January 2023 |
|
An inadequately reconstructed trial record prejudiced the appellant; convictions and sentences were set aside.
Criminal procedure – incomplete or lost trial record – reconstruction of evidence – adequacy and procedural requirements (open court, participation of State and defence) – right to fair trial and effective appeal – setting aside conviction and sentence; s324(c) read with s313 of the Criminal Procedure Act; DPP discretion to prosecute de novo.
|
25 January 2023 |
|
Rescission refused: registered pension-fund rule binding and municipality failed to show reasonable default explanation or bona fide defence.
Pension-fund rules — rule amendments valid and binding once approved and registered by Registrar; interpretation of rule requiring employer–union agreement — does not delay effect of registered rule; rescission — Uniform Rule 42 and common-law rescission require error or reasonable explanation and bona fide defence; default judgment — party who knowingly abstains from opposing may be presumed in wilful default and not entitled to rescission; challenges to registered rule must proceed by review/tribunal where applicable.
|
24 January 2023 |
|
Plaintiff’s severe injuries were found consistent with a motor vehicle collision, and the Road Accident Fund held liable for proven damages.
Road Accident Fund – pedestrian struck at night – whether injuries consistent with motor vehicle collision – burden of proof and assessment on probabilities where only plaintiff gives evidence – defendant’s failure to adduce evidence – liability for unknown vehicle/driver; merits separated from quantum.
|
24 January 2023 |
|
Trial set aside because accused was represented by counsel without right of appearance; retrial ordered before a different court.
Criminal procedure – special review of part‑heard magistrates’ proceedings under section 173 – gross irregularity. Representation – appearance by counsel lacking right of appearance constitutes a fatal irregularity and is notionally prejudicial. Relief – setting aside part‑heard trial and ordering retrial de novo; desirability that a different court hear the retrial (parity with s324 CPA). DPP consent not required for High Court special review of such part‑heard proceedings.
|
24 January 2023 |
|
Court held prescribed minimum sentences appropriate; accused’s youth and guilty plea not substantial and compelling to justify departure.
Criminal law – Minimum sentencing (s51 Criminal Law Amendment Act) – applicability where accused was a minor – substantial and compelling circumstances required to depart – guilty plea as neutral where evidence is overwhelming – sentencing for multiple rapes and aggravated robbery; victim impact and deterrence emphasised.
|
20 January 2023 |
|
Accused's s112(2) admissions established elements of four rapes and an aggravated robbery; convicted accordingly.
Criminal law – guilty plea under s112(2) – sufficiency of admissions to establish elements of rape and robbery – lack of consent and intent – use of knife as aggravating circumstance in robbery.
|
19 January 2023 |
|
Interdict to stay execution of writ attaching business shares dismissed for lack of prima facie right and abuse of process.
Family law; maintenance order enforced by contempt proceedings and writ of execution – application for stay by interdict; lis pendens argument rejected; exemption claim under s65(e) Magistrates’ Courts Act ("tools and implements of trade") not established; failure of candid disclosure in motion proceedings; wrong procedure to set aside writ; abuse of process and attorney-and-client costs awarded.
|
12 January 2023 |
| December 2022 |
|
|
Partial demolition ordered for outbuilding unlawfully encroaching building line, subject to engineer’s safety certificate.
Building law – building line encroachment – National Building Regulations – absence of proven written consent by neighbouring owner – prescription inapplicable to demolition declarations – discretionary and proportionate remedy: partial demolition subject to engineer’s certificate; costs.
|
15 December 2022 |
|
Execution pending appeal requires exceptional circumstances, irreparable harm to applicant and absence of irreparable harm to respondent.
Superior Courts Act s 18 – suspension pending appeal is norm – execution pending appeal is exceptional; applicant must prove (1) exceptional circumstances, (2) on a balance of probabilities irreparable harm to applicant if not executed, and (3) absence of irreparable harm to respondent if executed; mere assertions insufficient; prospects of success relevant but do not replace statutory twofold test.
|
14 December 2022 |
|
Applicant failed to establish a prima facie right to interim relief suspending his party suspension; application dismissed with costs.
Disciplinary law – internal party disciplinary cascade – NDCA and NEC jurisdiction; Interdictory relief – Setlogelo test applied to intra-party disciplinary suspension; Interpretation – contextual approach to ANC constitution; Interim relief – prima facie right, irreparable harm, balance of convenience; Costs – ordinary rule with allowance for two counsel in complex urgent litigation.
|
14 December 2022 |
|
Applicant’s urgent interdict failed: sale agreement was cancelled, urgency self-created and conduct amounted to abuse of process.
Interdict pendente lite — requirements: prima facie right, irreparable harm, absence of ordinary remedy, balance of convenience; Sale agreement cancelled — purchaser cannot claim specific performance where cancellation is undisputed; Urgency — must not be self-created; Abuse of process — repeated meritless litigation justifies punitive costs; Costs — attorney-and-own-client, taxable immediately.
|
13 December 2022 |
|
Rescission refused: applicants failed to prove delay explanation, service or locus standi defects, or prima facie defence.
Civil procedure — rescission under Rule 42(1) — requirements: reasonable explanation, good faith, bona fide defence with prima facie prospects — service of process and sheriff’s jurisdiction — locus standi of lessee/trust where letters of authority and lease exist — permission to occupy lapses on death.
|
13 December 2022 |
|
Application for rescission of an order restraining alleged unlawful occupation dismissed due to lack of a bona fide defense.
Civil Procedure – Rescission of Order – Jurisdiction of Sheriff – Locus Standi – Service of Court Process – Rule 42 of Uniform Rules.
|
13 December 2022 |
|
|
13 December 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal to the SCA granted in a review of an exploration right raising PAJA, consultation and language issues.
Administrative law — judicial review of administrative action — exploration right and seismic survey — meaningful consultation with affected communities — language and notice obligations — undue delay — PAJA ss 3 and 4 interplay — exhaustion of internal remedies — leave to appeal to Supreme Court of Appeal granted due to statutory-interpretation and public-importance considerations.
|
13 December 2022 |
|
Under amended rule 32, an evasive plea and unsupported oral compromise cannot defeat summary judgment for a secured loan.
Civil procedure – Summary judgment under amended rule 32 – plaintiff must engage with the plea to show defence not bona fide. Pleadings – Rule 18(5) – bald denials and evasive pleas impermissible. Defence – requirement of bona fide and good defence: full disclosure of nature, grounds and material facts. Contract – compromise/novation requires prior dispute; oral variation invalid where express non-variation clause requires written variation. Execution – ancillary rule 46A sale in execution application may be deferred pending summary judgment.
|
12 December 2022 |
|
Acquittal where prosecution failed to prove accused subjectively foresaw complainant’s incapacity to consent.
Sexual offences — incapacity to consent — definition of "person with a mental disability" under Sexual Offences Act; mens rea in rape — subjective foresight and honest belief in consent; inferential reasoning — only the sole reasonable inference may establish subjective foresight; testimonial competence of persons with intellectual disabilities — role of expert evidence and reasonable accommodations.
|
12 December 2022 |
|
Main seat of Eastern Cape High Court has concurrent jurisdiction; lis pendens failed because causes of action differ.
Civil procedure — rescission of judgment — distinction between quantification proceedings and rescission proceedings — lis pendens not established where causes of action differ. Superior Courts Act s6 — main seat (Makhanda) has concurrent jurisdiction over local seats in Eastern Cape. Jurisdiction — rescission may be heard at main seat despite judgments granted at local seat. Plea of appeal disguised as rescission — court will examine cause of action to determine genuine rescission.
|
6 December 2022 |
|
Court upheld a section 65A payment order, finding the appellant's life-insurance premiums may be used to satisfy respondents' judgments.
Magistrates' Court Act s65A — inquiry into financial position of judgment debtor — discretion to make just and equitable payment orders — life insurance premiums not a basic necessity and may be redirected to satisfy judgment debts — enforcement of default judgments by monthly instalments.
|
2 December 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal granted where reasonable prospects exist that a joint‑venturer may enforce its pro rata contractual rights independently.
Civil procedure – exception for vagueness and embarrassment – failure to plead basis to enforce rights arising from joint‑venture contract. Contract/partnership law – joint venture co‑creditor rights – whether a joint‑venturer may claim pro rata share independently. Leave to appeal – section 17(1)(a)(i) Superior Courts Act – reasonable prospects of success required.
|
2 December 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal granted against general damages award due to reasonable prospects of a materially higher award on appeal.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – quantum of damages – trial court’s wide discretion in assessing general damages – appellate interference where reasonable prospects exist of materially higher award.
|
1 December 2022 |
| November 2022 |
|
|
Attesting a forged signature in the signatory’s absence constitutes misconduct warranting suspension, though dishonesty must be proved for striking off.
Professional misconduct — attestation of signatures — witness attesting in absentia to forged signature — balance of probabilities establishes misconduct though dishonesty not proved — appropriate sanction: suspended suspension — regulator’s investigatory duties.
|
29 November 2022 |
|
Police who merely act on prosecutorial instructions do not necessarily 'set the law in motion' nor are they liable absent proof of malice.
Malicious prosecution — requisites: setting the law in motion, absence of reasonable and probable cause, malice, and failure of prosecution; investigating officer acting on prosecutor's instruction does not necessarily ‘set the law in motion’; withdrawal of charges/absence of prima facie case insufficient to establish malice; distinction between unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution and respective onuses.
|
29 November 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal granted because encroachment/expropriation issues raise compelling constitutional and public-law importance.
Leave to appeal — s 17(1) Superior Courts Act — test requires reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons — leave granted where matter raises public importance relating to encroachment/expropriation, municipal competence and property rights; costs of leave application to be costs in appeal.
|
29 November 2022 |
|
A reliable DNA match can alone support conviction if, on the facts, it excludes every reasonable alternative inference.
DNA evidence — expert and circumstantial evidence; admissibility and probative value determined by chain of custody, sample quality, STR match and statistical frequency; no general requirement for corroboration; inferential reasoning under Blom; alibi assessed against totality of evidence.
|
29 November 2022 |
|
Board unlawfully repudiated a Fidelity Fund claim by relying on a belated time-bar after requesting further proof.
Sheriffs Act s 35, s 36(2)(a) & (b), s 36(3) — time for lodging Fidelity Fund claims; election to require proof under (b) removes reliance on (a). Administrative law — review for irrationality, ulterior purpose and failure to consider relevant considerations (PAJA s 6(2)). Requirement to exhaust remedies against sheriff (s 37) — scope and application vis-à-vis Fund claims. Conduct of statutory bodies — obligation to act fairly, assist claimants and not rely on inconsequential technicalities. Costs — punitive attorney-and-client costs where respondent’s conduct obstructs deserving claimants.
|
22 November 2022 |
|
Appellants held in civil contempt for refusing to pay reinstated status quo ante fuel price; appeal dismissed.
Civil contempt – standard of proof on a balance of probabilities where committal not sought; Interpretation of orders – orders must be read with the reasons to ascertain intention; Reinstatement of status quo ante in urgent relief includes price where intended by reasons; Procedural non‑compliance and condonation – lapsed appeal and refusal to reinstate; Costs – punitive attorney and client scale with costs of two counsel.
|
22 November 2022 |
|
Identification and accomplice evidence were unreliable; recent-possession and alibi issues meant convictions could not stand.
Criminal law – identification evidence – dock and CCTV-based identifications after significant lapse of time require caution and corroboration. Criminal procedure – section 204 accomplice discharge – irregular to discharge before conclusion of case; accomplice evidence requires close scrutiny. Evidence – doctrine of recent possession – requires proof that property found was the stolen property; absent identification, doctrine inapplicable. Criminal law – alibi – State must disprove alibi beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so undermines conviction.
|
15 November 2022 |
|
Rescission granted: acceptable explanation for default and a prima facie defence as to game-count justified setting aside default judgment.
Rescission of default judgment; common law "sufficient cause" requires reasonable explanation for default and a bona fide defence with some prospect of success; wilful/default conduct relevant but not determinative; sale of property including game — dispute as to game-count (Annexure A1) can found prima facie defence; statutory permits and fencing compliance not established as prima facie defence.
|
8 November 2022 |
|
A magistrate’s cumulative courtroom interventions gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, warranting review and retrial.
Criminal procedure — Recusal and review — Reasonable apprehension of bias — Leading/questioning by presiding magistrate potentially augmenting State case may found objective apprehension of bias under s 22(1)(b) Superior Courts Act; Review of lower court proceedings — High Court intervention justified where refusal to recuse risks grave injustice; Delay/condonation — multi‑factor enquiry, merits may outweigh delay; Relief — setting aside refusal, referral to DPP for re‑arraignment and de novo trial before another magistrate.
|
8 November 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal refused — no reasonable prospect another court would reach a different conclusion.
Appeal — Leave to appeal — s17(1) Superior Courts Act — test whether another court may reasonably reach a different conclusion; Procedural non-compliance — whether non-compliance excused where no prejudice — Miller v Natmed distinguished; Costs — no order where respondents did not oppose leave application.
|
8 November 2022 |