|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2025 |
|
|
Issue estoppel and prescription bar a subsequent delictual damages claim based on the same factual matrix.
Civil procedure — res judicata and issue estoppel — same factual matrix and prior adjudication of prescription bar re-litigation; Prescription Act — commencement of prescription requires knowledge of minimum facts; continuous wrong does not postpone prescription of delictual financial losses; section 13(2) reciprocity inapplicable to delictual claims.
|
25 November 2025 |
|
Whether State Liability Act s2(2) and Joint Rule 23(m) apply to default proceedings against the Road Accident Fund.
Procedure — Road Accident Fund — Whether State Liability Act s2(2) applies to RAF — RAF is a juristic entity, not a "department" — Rule 23(m) (Joint Rules) applies to the State only — default judgment against RAF governed by Uniform Rule 31(4).
|
25 November 2025 |
|
Post‑expiry curatorship cannot interrupt RAF five‑year prescription; claim dismissed for prescription.
Road Accident Fund Act s23(1)-(3) – two‑stage prescription (3‑year lodgement; 5‑year enforcement) – curatorship suspends prescription only if it exists during statutory period – ex post appointment of curator ad litem cannot revive prescribed claim – without‑prejudice offers do not interrupt prescription – parties bound by pleadings.
|
20 November 2025 |
|
Applicants unlawfully re‑arrested and detained; respondent liable for damages until bail on 3 June 2019.
Criminal procedure — arrest and detention — whether police conduct on 2 May 2019 constituted arrest; lawfulness of re‑arrest on 13 May 2019; exercise of discretion and principle of legality; police failure to produce criminal profiles causing remand; causation — court appearance not a novus actus; damages for unlawful arrest and detention.
|
18 November 2025 |
|
Police unlawfully re‑arrested and detained plaintiffs; remand was foreseeable, so state liable and each plaintiff awarded R630,000.
Criminal procedure – Unlawful arrest and detention – Double arrest for same alleged offence – Doctrine of legality – Police duty to justify detention and to timeously obtain suspect profiles – Causation: magistrate’s remand not a novus actus where remand was foreseeable and reconciled by arresting officers – Quantum for unlawful detention.
|
18 November 2025 |
|
The applicant succeeded: police liable for malicious arrest; the prosecuting authority liable for malicious prosecution; magistrate not liable.
Delict — Malicious arrest and detention — requirements: instigation, absence of reasonable and probable cause, and malice; vicarious liability of police for arrest. Malicious prosecution — prosecutorial discretion; requirement of reasonable and probable cause (objective and subjective); prosecution policy and duty to secure minimum evidence (J88 medical report). Judicial acts — Magistrate’s adjudicative function not equivalent to setting the law in motion. Damages for deprivation of liberty and malicious prosecution; costs allocation.
|
18 November 2025 |
|
New s93ter(1) grants magistrates discretion on appointing lay assessors; no review where plea to competent verdict was voluntary.
Magistrates' Courts Act s93ter(1) (as substituted) – lay assessors – substitution confers discretion; Criminal Procedure Act s86 – amendment of charges; plea to competent verdict; review for gross irregularity.
|
18 November 2025 |
|
Spoliation unavailable for purely contractual personal rights to water; applicant failed to show possession-based right, so relief dismissed.
* Spoliation (mandament van spolie) – requirement of possession or a right incident to possession – personal/contractual rights to services insufficient; prior supply alone does not suffice. * Water supply – only protected by spoliation when it is an incident of possession (e.g., servitude or statutory right). * Lawful disconnection – owner’s request under municipal credit-control policy can render disconnection lawful.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
Regulation 50 creates a dispute-resolution mechanism, not an internal remedy under PAJA; applicant failed to show urgency and had discovery available.
* Municipal procurement – Regulation 50 (Municipal Supply Chain Management Regulations) – dispute-resolution mechanism/mediatory process, not an internal appeal under PAJA s7(2).
* Administrative law – exhaustion of internal remedies – scope of "internal remedy" under PAJA.
* Civil procedure – availability of discovery (Rule 35) in pending review proceedings as alternative remedy.
* Urgency – requirements for urgent relief where review proceedings are pending and delay may be addressed by ordinary processes.
* Role of provincial treasury – advisory/monitoring function and communication of outcomes to parties escalating objections.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
District court lacked jurisdiction to detain accused as State Patient and failed to conduct s77 enquiry or ensure representation.
Criminal Procedure Act s77 — Mental capacity enquiries; detention as State Patient; jurisdiction of district vs regional court in murder matters; requirement of legal representation under s77(1A) and constitutional right to counsel; review and setting aside of irregular detention order.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
Deed of sale unsigned as required by statute is void; respondents failed to establish rights for a final interdict.
* Alienation of Land Act s 2(1) – formal requirement that deeds of alienation be signed by parties or agents with written authority; non-compliance renders agreement void ab initio.
* Alienation of Land Act s 28 – limits of saving non-compliant alienation where alienee has not fully performed and no transfer has occurred.
* Interdicts – distinction between interim and final interdict tests; final interdict requires clear right, injury or reasonable apprehension, and absence of alternative remedies.
* Jurisdiction – monetary and territorial jurisdiction: absent a valid contract the asserted purchase price cannot establish monetary jurisdiction; cause of action arising in court’s division confers territorial jurisdiction.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
A tender expires at the end of its validity period and cannot be revived absent a timeous, consensual extension by bidders.
* Public procurement – tender validity period – expiration and revival – requirement of timeous, consensual extension by all bidders.* Administrative law – notice of intention to award vs final award – notice alone does not interrupt validity absent a final award within period.* Tender law – awards made after expiry without extension are invalid.* Municipal procurement – adherence to bid evaluation and adjudication recommendations and transparent publication requirements.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
Arrest at scene was unlawful—community pressure and "protective custody" do not satisfy s 40(1)(b)'s reasonable-suspicion requirement.
Criminal procedure — Arrest without warrant — s 40(1)(b) CPA — onus on arrestor to show objective reasonable suspicion of Schedule 1 offence; "protective custody" or fear of mob justice not a lawful basis for arrest; deprivation of liberty occurs when person placed in police vehicle at scene; police detention until first court appearance must be justified by arrestor; unlawful arrest renders initial detention compensable.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
Warrantless arrest based on positive identification and medical evidence was lawful; malicious prosecution not established.
Criminal procedure — Warrantless arrest under s40(1)(b) CPA — Requirement of reasonable suspicion on reasonable grounds; identification and medical report as credible information. Malicious prosecution — Necessary elements: instigation, absence of reasonable and probable cause, malice and failure of prosecution; prosecutor’s honest belief and objective assessment of docket material. Police discretion to detain and court’s role in remand decisions. Costs follow result.
|
4 November 2025 |
| October 2025 |
|
|
Court found no substantial and compelling circumstances to depart from minimum sentences for violent cash‑in‑transit robberies; life imprisonment imposed for murder.
* Criminal law – Sentencing – Application of Minimum Sentences Act s 51 and Schedules – whether substantial and compelling circumstances justify departure.
* Sentencing – weight of prolonged pre-trial detention – not automatically substantial and compelling.
* Confession and alleged remorse – insufficient without more to justify deviation from prescribed minimums.
* Sentencing – role of ringleader and extreme violence as aggravating factors.
* Firearms Control Act s 103 – declaration of unfitness to possess firearms.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Notice served within six months of acquiring material facts; prescription defence dismissed and s 3 compliance declared.
* Civil procedure — Section 3 Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of the State Act — notice of intention to institute legal proceedings — requirement to serve notice within six months of debt becoming due.
* Prescription — when prescription begins — creditor’s knowledge of facts giving rise to debt; creditor deemed to have such knowledge only when she had or could have acquired it by reasonable care (Links; Macleod).
* Medical negligence — lay litigant’s need for expert evidence to identify cause and fault; delay attributable to awaiting expert/medical information may postpone accrual of debt.
* Condonation/section 3(4) — good cause and prejudice to organ of state — short delay after acquisition of material facts and existence of hospital records weighed against prejudice.
|
30 October 2025 |
|
Whether driving, providing light and presence at a chase can found common-purpose murder; admissibility of confession and joint-possession issues.
Criminal law – Confession and pointing out – Admissibility under s217 CPA; Common purpose – requirements for inferring liability for murder; Joint possession of firearms – Nkosi/Makhubela test; Inferential reasoning – Blom principles; Competent verdicts – s270 CPA; Fair trial – potential conflict of interest from joint legal representation.
|
28 October 2025 |
|
Confession admitted but State failed to prove accused no.2 guilty of murder or firearm offences; accused discharged.
Criminal law – murder – doctrine of common purpose – mere presence, pursuit and provision of vehicle lights insufficient to establish intention to kill; confession and pointing out – admissibility under s217 CPA – held admissible; unlawful possession of firearms – requirement for joint possession (S v Nkosi; Makhubela) – State conceded against accused no.2; fair trial – potential conflict from joint legal representation noted.
|
28 October 2025 |
|
The appellant's rape conviction and 10-year sentence were upheld; complainant credible and delay in reporting not fatal to prosecution.
Criminal law – rape – single complainant evidence – cautionary approach; delay in reporting – s 59 Sexual Offences Amendment Act; corroboration by medical and sibling evidence; appellate review of factual findings; sentence and prescribed minimums.
|
24 October 2025 |
|
A municipality’s delayed self-review of a procurement decision was dismissed; contractor entitled to payment and declaratory relief.
Administrative law – state self-review and procurement – undue delay and condonation – principle of legality – balancing public interest and prejudice to innocent contractors – declaratory relief and payment for services rendered under an impugned contract.
|
23 October 2025 |
|
Default judgment: police liable for unlawful arrest, detention and malicious prosecution; damages and costs awarded to the applicant.
* Criminal procedure – warrantless arrest – section 40 CPA – objective test of reasonable suspicion; onus shifts to state once interference with liberty proved.
* Civil liability – unlawful arrest and detention – damages as solatium and deterrence.
* Malicious prosecution – initiation of criminal process without reasonable basis; vicarious liability of the state.
* Civil procedure – bare denial struck as irregular; failure to amend plea — default judgment consequences.
* Quantum – assessment guided by precedent; award of R140,000 (detention) and R120,000 (malicious prosecution).
|
23 October 2025 |
|
Court awards actuarially quantified loss of earnings for early retirement due to accident, applying a 20% contingency deduction.
• Road Accident Fund — quantification of loss of earnings — actuarial evidence persuasive but not binding — judicial discretion in applying contingencies; • Personal injury — early retirement caused by accident — vocational experts’ consensus; • Procedural — failure to comply with discovery (Rule 35) and striking out of defence relevant to quantum hearing.
|
23 October 2025 |
|
Applicants obtained a stay of eviction, alleging lack of service, PIE non‑compliance and improper standing.
Urgent application — intervention as parties — requirements for intervention (direct and substantial interest; bona fide triable defence) — stay/suspension of eviction order — PIE s 4(2) notice and service — standing to institute eviction (SGB vs state organ) — joinder of Department/MEC and municipality — right to housing and risk of homelessness.
|
23 October 2025 |
|
Magistrate unlawfully remanded a bailed person; acted without investigatory power or fair procedure; Minister vicariously liable, R360,000 awarded.
• Constitutional law — Right to freedom and security (s12(1)(a)) and dignity (s10) — unlawful/removal of liberty by magistrate; • Judicial immunity — limits where judicial officer acts mala fide or in bad faith; • Criminal procedure — cancellation of bail (s68(1)(e) & (g)) requires jurisdictional facts and information on oath; • Separation of powers — courts lack investigative powers; police/prosecutors responsible for investigations; • State liability — vicarious liability of Minister for wrongful acts of judicial officer.
|
21 October 2025 |
|
Postponement granted despite applicant’s self‑created delays; applicant ordered to pay costs on scale B including two counsel.
Postponement application – judicial discretion – good cause required – self‑created delay and malafides – disputed document authenticity not admitted at pre‑trial – costs against party responsible for delays (scale B, costs of specified trial dates and two counsel).
|
21 October 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to prove a copied will was a true copy and did not justify bypassing the original; application dismissed with costs.
Wills Act s 2(3) – acceptance of non‑compliant wills; burden to prove copy is a true copy; existence of original with third party; applicant’s duty to pursue original or compel production; ipse dixit insufficient; Estates Act s 8(4B) (duplicate originals) noted.
|
16 October 2025 |
| September 2025 |
|
|
Contractual repudiation and lack of consensus rendered the tender cancellation a contractual remedy, not reviewable administrative action.
* Procurement/Tenders – post-award relationship – distinction between administrative action and contractual remedies; applicability of PAJA. * Contract law – formation, consensus on material terms, repudiation and anticipatory breach. * Restitution – liability for use of equipment following contract cancellation.
|
29 September 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to prove wilful, mala fide non‑compliance with court orders; contempt application dismissed.
Contempt of court — essential elements: existence of order; notice to alleged contemnor; non‑compliance; wilful and mala fide conduct — where committal sought proof beyond reasonable doubt; ambiguous orders (e.g. directing settlement) may be unenforceable; mere presence of counsel in court does not satisfy personal service requirement.
|
23 September 2025 |
|
Loss of support and funeral claims dismissed for lack of proof; R600,000 awarded for plaintiff's PTSD-related general damages.
* Delict — Wrongful death — Quantum — Proof of loss of support requires reliable evidence of deceased's earnings; informal/self-employed income demands corroboration.
* Expert evidence — Industrial/actuarial reliance on unverified litigant-supplied figures undermines weight of reports.
* Pleadings — Court will not grant damages (loss of earnings) on issues not pleaded.
* Damages — General damages awarded for PTSD/complex bereavement; funeral and loss of support claims dismissed for lack of proof.
* Costs — Successful plaintiff awarded costs, including specified expert and two counsel.
|
23 September 2025 |
|
Applicant lacked standing and motion proceedings were inappropriate due to genuine disputes of fact and procedural non‑compliance.
• Civil procedure – locus standi – adequacy of interest to challenge familial customary marriage on behalf of minor – standing must be direct, current and not too remote.
• Motion proceedings – disputes of fact – Plascon‑Evans/Wightman principles – referral to oral evidence where disputes are genuine and far‑reaching.
• Estate procedure – rule 6(9) – requirement to submit estate‑related applications to the Master and involve executors.
• Customary marriage – proof by lobola letter, traditional leaders’ affidavits and family confirmations relevant to existence of marriage.
|
23 September 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused; court can order DNA testing of adults but exhumation was an undue, drastic measure.
* Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – Section 17 Superior Courts Act – reasonable prospect of success required.
* Family/paternity evidence – Court power to order DNA testing of adults to establish paternity or for administration of justice.
* Forensic procedure – Exhumation and DNA testing of deceased’s remains is a drastic measure implicating dignity and public morals; consider less intrusive alternatives (e.g., sibling testing).
* Costs – unsuccessful leave application dismissed with costs on Scale B.
|
16 September 2025 |
|
Appellant’s failure to monitor and promptly deliver caused respondent’s child’s intrapartum hypoxic brain injury; appeal dismissed.
• Medical negligence – maternity care – inadequate intrapartum monitoring and failure to expedite delivery – breach of Guidelines for Maternity Care. • Causation – factual (but-for) and legal causation established for intrapartum hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury. • Evidence – admissibility and weight of medical records under s 3 Law of Evidence Amendment Act; records to be assessed as whole and weighed against oral testimony. • Expert evidence – binding effect of joint minutes and circumstances in which an expert may resile (Bee v RAF and related authorities). • Alternative causation (IUGR, nuchal cord, rapid labour) insufficiently proven to break causal link.
|
16 September 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to annex or prove a written right of first refusal and failed to establish the CEO’s authority; application dismissed.
Rule 18(6) URC – obligation to annex written contract relied on; condonation for non-compliance; agency and authority – requirement to plead and prove actual or apparent authority to bind statutory entities; doctrine of legality – public bodies may only exercise powers conferred by law or delegated by the board; requirements for proving existence and acceptance of contractual offers (right of first refusal).
|
11 September 2025 |
|
Unlawful and arbitrary police arrest and detention, with aggravating humiliation and degrading conditions, justified substantial damages for infringement of rights.
Delict – Unlawful arrest and detention – Quantum – Aggravating circumstances – Public humiliation; degrading detention conditions; arbitrary police conduct – Damages for violation of rights to liberty and dignity – Costs – Jurisdiction of court.
|
9 September 2025 |
|
Medical‑negligence claim had not prescribed because plaintiff acquired requisite knowledge only in August 2019.
Prescription — Prescription Act s 11(d) and s 12(3) — accrual of delictual cause of action — knowledge of identity of debtor and facts from which debt arises — onus on defendant pleading prescription — professional negligence context.
|
9 September 2025 |
|
Interdictory relief was refused to informal traders who failed to establish a right to trade in prohibited municipal areas.
Administrative law – interdict – informal trading – statutory regulation of street trading – right to trade under section 22 of the Constitution – locus standi – municipal enforcement of by-laws – public policy and doctrine of legality – unlawful trading in prohibited areas – interdictory relief for past versus reasonably apprehended future conduct.
|
5 September 2025 |
|
Court refused leave to appeal against the dismissal of a spoliation claim challenging lawful vehicle impoundment under traffic legislation.
Mandament van spolie – impoundment of motor vehicle – lawfulness of removal under National Road Traffic Act and Municipal By-Law – leave to appeal – prospects of success – pleading new grounds – Superior Court Act s17(1).
|
5 September 2025 |
|
A claim for loss of amenities of life on behalf of a profoundly impaired minor was dismissed as not competent in law.
Delict – Damages – General damages – Loss of amenities of life – Measure of damages – Whether unconscious or severely cognitively impaired plaintiffs can claim – Requirement of personal benefit – Stare decisis and Supreme Court of Appeal authority.
|
4 September 2025 |
|
Arrest lawful, but prosecutor’s improper Schedule 6 opposition caused unlawful detention; malicious prosecution not established.
Criminal procedure – warrantless arrest under s 40(1)(b) CPA – reasonable suspicion on reasonable grounds; Detention – lawfulness from arrest to first appearance; Bail scheduling – improper categorisation as Schedule 6 leading to unlawful post-appearance detention; Malicious prosecution – requirement of absence of reasonable and probable cause and malice; State liability – prosecutor liable for unlawful detention caused by prosecution decisions.
|
2 September 2025 |
|
Exhibiting an incorrect warrant makes an arrest unlawful; police liable only until the plaintiff’s first court appearance.
Criminal procedure – arrest on warrant – strict compliance with s39(2) (duty to inform/produce warrant) – exhibiting incorrect warrant renders arrest unlawful; Liability of State for detention – causation and remoteness – De Klerk principle; s67 (bail cancellation/forfeiture) and effect on post‑appearance detention.
|
2 September 2025 |
| August 2025 |
|
|
A late leave‑to‑appeal application without an extension does not suspend execution; appeal upheld and urgent application dismissed.
• Civil procedure – suspension of execution – s 18(1) of the Act and Rule 49(1)(b) – timely application for leave to appeal (within 15 days) as precondition for suspension.
• Belated application for leave – lapse where no court order extended the 15‑day period – s 18(1) protection inapplicable.
• Mootness – court may decide merits in interests of justice.
• Rule 42(1)(b) – variation/correction of own order to remove contradiction between judgment and operative order.
• Costs – successful appellant awarded costs including two counsel; costs ordered on scale B (Rule 67A).
|
29 August 2025 |
|
A belated application for leave to appeal does not suspend execution of a judgment absent court-authorized extension under Uniform Rule 49(1)(b).
Civil procedure – Suspension of court orders pending appeal – Section 18(1) of Superior Courts Act – Rule 49(1)(b) of Uniform Rules – Failure to bring application for leave to appeal within prescribed period – Effect on right to seek suspension of order – Condonation applications do not revive lapsed right or suspend execution automatically – Public interest in finality of litigation and proper interpretation of rules.
|
28 August 2025 |
|
Application to strike out respondent’s claim for failure to provide particulars dismissed; punitive costs awarded for abusive litigation conduct.
Civil procedure – Interlocutory application – Request for further particulars – Delivery requirements of Rule 21(2) Uniform Rules of Court – Striking out defence – Necessity of particulars – Costs on punitive scale for dilatory and abusive litigation conduct.
|
26 August 2025 |
|
The court held the Minister of Police liable for the plaintiff's injuries after being negligently shot by police during a pursuit.
Delict – Police liability – Unlawful and negligent discharge of firearm by police during pursuit of a suspect – Passenger in taxi struck and injured – Evidence – Failure of defendant to call material witness – Negligence on part of police established on a balance of probabilities – Liability for damages confirmed.
|
26 August 2025 |
|
A magistrate’s refusal of bail was set aside on appeal where the applicant’s serious health condition constituted an exceptional circumstance.
Criminal procedure – bail appeal – schedule 6 offences – exceptional circumstances – interests of justice – health condition as exceptional circumstance – presumption of innocence – fairness of proceedings – consideration of evidence improperly omitted by lower court.
|
26 August 2025 |
|
Police were found liable for unlawful arrest, search, and detention, with damages awarded for the violation of constitutional rights.
Delict – Police liability – Unlawful arrest, search and detention – Requirement of reasonable suspicion – Quantum of damages – Assessment of constitutional rights violations – Absence of consent for search.
|
21 August 2025 |
|
Failure to admonish a competent child witness does not render evidence inadmissible; minimum sentence may be reduced if disproportionate.
Criminal law – Rape – Sentencing of minimum sentences under Criminal Law Amendment Act – Substantial and compelling circumstances – Admissibility of evidence of child witnesses – Competence and oath/admonition procedures under CPA – No automatic requirement for admonition or inquiry based solely on age – Sentence must be proportionate to the circumstances of the case.
|
19 August 2025 |
|
Life imprisonment for contract murder upheld; personal circumstances and advanced age not substantial and compelling justifications for deviation.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum sentences – Murder – Contract killing – Substantial and compelling circumstances – Advanced age – Remorse – Appeal against sentence – Section 51(1) of Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997 – When deviation from minimum sentence justified.
|
19 August 2025 |
|
Application for leave to appeal dismissal of rescission of taxed costs refused for lack of reasonable prospects of success.
Leave to appeal – Taxation of costs – Service of notice of set down – Application of Uniform Rule 70 – Reasonable prospects of success – Standards for granting leave to appeal under s 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act.
|
19 August 2025 |
|
Conviction and sentence for rape set aside where single child witness's evidence lacked corroboration and proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Rape – Single witness and child witness testimony – Cautionary rule – Requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Forensic evidence – Evidential misdirection – Setting aside conviction where evidence does not support guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
19 August 2025 |