|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2024 |
|
|
Trial was unfair due to failure to protect the accused’s section 35(3) rights; conviction and sentence set aside.
Criminal procedure – fair trial rights (s 35(3)) – right to legal representation and legal aid – judicial impartiality and prohibition of private communication with one party’s counsel – admission/reliance on protection orders – sentence disproportionate.
|
4 June 2024 |
|
Disputed allegations of a prior customary marriage required referral to oral evidence under Rule 6(5)(g).
Customary marriage — proof and corroboration — uncorroborated allegations of prior customary marriage where key witnesses are deceased; Civil marriage — potential nullity if prior customary marriage exists; Civil procedure — Uniform Rule 6(5)(g) — referral to oral evidence where disputes of fact cannot be resolved on affidavit; Procedural directions for oral evidence, subpoenas and discovery.
|
4 June 2024 |
| May 2024 |
|
|
Court authorised execution against the judgment debtor’s primary residence under Rule 46A, set R650,000 reserve price, and awarded costs.
* Civil procedure – Rule 46A – execution against primary residence – court must consider all relevant factors before authorising sale in execution. * Requirement to excuss movables before execution against immovable property; effect of prior dismissal based on non-excussion. * Non-joinder of preferent creditors/local authority – limits and consequences. * Rule 41A mediation – discretion to refer and when refusal is justified. * Setting reserve price under Rule 46A(8)(e). * Conduct of judgment debtor (including prior contempt) as factor in Rule 46A assessment.
|
31 May 2024 |
|
A consent order staying a disciplinary hearing rendered the urgent challenge moot, and the employer was ordered to pay costs.
* Administrative/disciplinary procedure – interlocutory relief – urgency – stay and interdict of internal disciplinary hearing; consent order rendering relief moot. * Mootness and justiciability – courts should not give advisory opinions on abstract or academic disputes. * Costs – where consent order grants operative relief sought, successful party entitled to costs; costs follow the event.
|
31 May 2024 |
|
An urgent court may not suspend a lawful statutory precautionary suspension when an adequate statutory appeal remedy exists.
Administrative law — statutory suspension of registration under section 26(1) of the Private Security Industry Regulation Act — precautionary suspension versus punitive action — adequacy of statutory appeal under section 30(1) — failure to exhaust alternative remedy — urgency and punitive costs.
|
30 May 2024 |
|
Forfeiture under s9(1) requires proof of substantial misconduct and undue benefit; absent such proof, estate must be divided.
Divorce Act s9(1) – forfeiture of benefits – requirement to prove nature and extent of benefit; substantial misconduct necessary for forfeiture; onus on applicant to show undue benefit; appeal setting aside magistrate's forfeiture order and substituting division of joint estate.
|
30 May 2024 |
|
Part-payment of attorney's bill does not bar a client's demand for taxation; action must be stayed pending taxation.
Costs — Attorney-and-client bill — Disputed quantum — Section 80(4) Magistrates’ Courts Act and Rule 33(18) — Demand for taxation requires stay of action — Part-payment does not necessarily constitute acquiescence or waiver — Role of taxing master in assessing reasonableness and quantum of legal fees.
|
30 May 2024 |
|
Admission alone does not create a binding right to register; applicant failed to prove contract or breach of s29(1)(b).
Administrative law; contract formation — university admission versus registration; first-come-first-served online registration and availability of space; proof of offer and acceptance; right to further education (s29(1)(b)) — progressive realization and resource constraints; urgency under Uniform Rule 6(12).
|
28 May 2024 |
|
Eviction application dismissed because the applicant failed to prove authority to institute and prosecute the proceedings.
Procedure — Motion proceedings by artificial persons — Authority to institute and prosecute — Rule 7(1) — Proof of authorisation when challenged — Eviction application dismissed for lack of authority.
|
28 May 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where plaintiffs failed to prove defendant dug the hole or that its negligence caused the child's drowning.
• Civil liability – wrongful death/drowning – proof of causation and identity of tortfeasor required
• Evidence – inferences from conciliatory conduct (apology/contribution to funeral) do not substitute for proof of causation
• Pleadings – particulars of claim must be sufficiently clear; vacillation between causes of action problematic
• Procedure – leave to appeal under s17(1) Superior Courts Act requires reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons
|
27 May 2024 |
|
Applicant's PAIA claim dismissed: wrong respondent cited and PAIA excluded where criminal/disciplinary proceedings had already commenced.
* Administrative law – PAIA – applicability of PAIA where criminal/disciplinary proceedings pending – s 7(1) PAIA excludes post-commencement requests for records relevant to such proceedings.
* Civil procedure – citation and joinder – misjoinder/non-joinder of juristic public college v. departmental information officer.
* Education law – Further Education and Training Act s 45 – access to college records in exercise and protection of rights during disciplinary processes.
* Costs – Biowatch principles applied; no order as to costs in public-rights litigation.
|
24 May 2024 |
|
An owner's tender of adequate security in attorneys' trust defeats a lien, warranting court-ordered release of a towed vehicle.
Possessory lien – Towing and storage charges – Adequacy of substitute security (attorney's trust account) to defeat lien – Disputes about contract and reasonableness are for trial – Court may order release of towed vehicle and authorize sheriff.
|
23 May 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal dismissed: declaratory relief resembling review is subject to undue-delay/condonation rules and proceedings were res judicata.
Administrative law – declaratory relief framed as review – undue delay and condonation; Civil procedure – Rule 49(4) notice of appeal requirements; Res judicata and 'once and for all' rule – substance over form; Dispute of fact on papers – need for referral to oral evidence; Costs – costs follow event, appellate restraint absent exceptional circumstances.
|
21 May 2024 |
|
Assessor irregularities and unsworn witness testimony vitiated the applicant's conviction and sentence.
* Criminal procedure – Assessors – Section 93ter(3) requires assessors to be sworn before hearing evidence; failure is a peremptory irregularity rendering assessments invalid.
* Criminal procedure – Assessors – Trial proceeding with one assessor after recusal requires judicial exercise of discretion with reasons on record; lack thereof vitiates proceedings.
* Criminal procedure – Prosecutor’s private communications with assessors outside court prejudicial and irregular.
* Evidence – Witness testimony must be under oath or affirmation (s162 CPA); unsworn testimony inadmissible.
* Criminal procedure – Section 170 CPA applies to accused persons; convicting a witness under s170 is unlawful.
|
17 May 2024 |
|
Court admitted confessions, accepted accomplice corroboration and convicted accused on multiple counts, finding common purpose liability for accused 5.
Criminal law – admissibility of confessions and pointings out to commissioned officers – voluntariness; Accomplice evidence – caution and corroboration; Common purpose – liability of participant who withdraws late or not at all; Late‑raised alibi – probative value; Ballistics/forensic corroboration of confessions.
|
17 May 2024 |
|
Assault proved; defendant liable for all injuries as initial assault causally linked to subsequent harm.
Delict – assault – proof of assault and causation; medical J88 evidence; application of factual (but‑for) and legal causation; weight of inconsistent defendant evidence and effect of criminal plea on civil liability.
|
16 May 2024 |
|
Applicant failed to justify rescission of order striking out its defence and raised new grounds impermissibly in reply.
Pleadings and affidavits — clarity and brevity required; rescission of order striking out defence — applicant must explain non-compliance and show prospects of success; new grounds in replying affidavit — impermissible and prejudicial; Rule 60 procedure for striking out — drastic remedy requiring full factual basis; Rule 49(8) reliance cannot be raised for first time in reply.
|
15 May 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal refused for lack of reasonable prospects; punitive attorney-and-client costs awarded.
Civil procedure – Urgent applications and reconsideration under Uniform Rule 6(12)(c) – Rule 6(5)(c) not applicable to anticipation of urgent reconsideration – Leave to appeal under section 17 Superior Courts Act requires reasonable prospects of success – Mootness of relief confined to interdict of burial – Frivolous litigation may attract attorney-and-client costs.
|
14 May 2024 |
|
Failure to testify undermined quantum proof; expert opinions need factual foundation; absolution from the instance ordered.
Employment law – wrongful dismissal – quantum of damages – plaintiff’s duty to give evidence where central facts are exclusively within her knowledge; expert opinion requires factual foundation; absolution from the instance appropriate where plaintiff’s evidence has potential to succeed.
|
14 May 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where relief was overbroad, claimants were not joined, and writs stemmed from unchallenged court orders.
Urgent applications — stay of execution — overly broad/unclear relief and failure to join necessary parties; leave to appeal — reasonable prospects of success required under s17(1) Superior Courts Act; execution of writs obtained pursuant to unchallenged court orders; Board Notice 271 of 2022 — prior litigation and invalidation of certain clauses.
|
10 May 2024 |
|
Conviction set aside where guilty plea was accepted without proper s112 questioning and magistrate’s demeaning conduct.
Criminal procedure – guilty plea – section 112(1)(b) CPA – judicial questioning to establish admission of elements; Criminal procedure – section 113 CPA – change of plea to not guilty where defence appears; Right to legal representation – accused must be informed and able to exercise right; Sentencing – sentence must be founded on competent facts and law, cannot punish for uncharged conduct; Judicial conduct – demeaning language by presiding officer may constitute misconduct; Review – conviction and sentence set aside and immediate release ordered.
|
9 May 2024 |
|
Applicant failed to prove exceptional circumstances for bail in a Schedule 6 robbery; appeal dismissed.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Schedule 6 offence – section 60(11)(a) – onus on accused to prove exceptional circumstances – identification evidence and recovered property can sustain a prima facie case – appellate review under section 65(4) limited to misdirection or wrongful exercise of discretion; immigration status, health and family dependence do not automatically constitute exceptional circumstances.
|
2 May 2024 |
|
Applicants failed to show exceptional circumstances or evidence to interdict disciplinary hearings pending review.
Urgent interim relief — disciplinary inquiries — intervention in ongoing internal disciplinary processes requires exceptional circumstances; motion proceedings require adequate factual pleading and supporting documents; distinction between trusts, NPOs and NPCs relevant to locus and employer authority; EMIS registration number not equivalent to company registration; alternative remedies (disciplinary point in limine, CCMA, review) available.
|
2 May 2024 |
|
Completed investigation, deteriorating health and financial prejudice can constitute exceptional circumstances justifying bail.
Bail — renewed application on new facts — completion of investigation; exceptional circumstances under s60(11)(a) — deteriorating health, financial prejudice and pending forfeiture; pre‑trial delay; State’s duty to rebut uncontested allegations; conditions to protect witnesses and ensure attendance.
|
2 May 2024 |
|
Completion of investigations, health deterioration, trial delay and forfeiture prejudice amounted to exceptional circumstances justifying bail.
Bail — renewed application on new facts — completion of investigations, trial delay, deteriorating health and pending forfeiture can constitute new facts and exceptional circumstances under s 60(11)(a) CPA; appeal under s 65(4) — appellate court may set aside refusal if lower court was wrong; risk to witnesses/public must be assessed with reference to s 60(7) and rebutted by evidence.
|
2 May 2024 |
| April 2024 |
|
|
Court upheld MEC’s PAJA-regulated investigation and recognition of a traditional headman as lawful and procedurally fair.
Administrative law – PAJA review of administrative action – Recognition of traditional leader – Delegation of Premier’s powers to MEC – Uniform Rule 53 record – Customary succession and role of royal family – Procedural fairness (audi alteram partem) – Plascon‑Evans application vs referral for oral evidence (Rule 6(5)(g)).
|
30 April 2024 |
|
Condonation granted but leave to appeal refused due to delay, unpleaded DZ defences, and reasonable damages assessment.
Appeal — condonation granted for late filing; leave to appeal refused — no reasonable prospect of success or compelling reason (s 17(1)(a) SCA). Amendment of pleadings — DZ defences — inordinate delay, failure to plead or prove defences, and prejudice to respondent. Quantum — substantial agreement on most heads; court‑assessed caregiving and housing reasonable on evidence. Costs awarded, including two counsel.
|
25 April 2024 |
|
Applicant interdicted unlawful development in protected coastal conservation area; respondent’s claimed permission to occupy was unproven.
Environmental law – Coastal conservation area (Decree 9 of 1992) – Development permitted only by departmental permit; Proclamation 26 of 1936 – permissions to occupy and transfers – Motion proceedings: burden and quality of evidence; hearsay inadmissible where primary witnesses available – Final interdict requisites – alternative remedies – Rule 16A and pleading of constitutional issues.
|
23 April 2024 |
| March 2024 |
|
|
Tender withdrawal based on erroneous legal assumptions set aside; applicant substituted as successful bidder.
Municipal procurement – tender requirements and CIDB grading – compliance with mandatory conditions; notice of intention to award and effect on tender validity; withdrawal/cancellation of tender – PAJA reviewability, procedural fairness and rationality; substitution remedy and exceptional circumstances (Trencon principles); procurement must meet s217 Constitution fairness, transparency and cost-effectiveness.
|
28 March 2024 |
|
Late lodgement of leave to appeal did not extinguish appeal rights; section 18 suspended execution of the orders.
Suspension pending appeal — s18(1) Superior Courts Act — effect of belated application for leave to appeal; interplay between rule 49(1)(b)/(6) and s18; condonation and non-compliance; discretionary stay under rule 45A and interlocutory interdict principles.
|
27 March 2024 |
|
An employee with keys and day‑to‑day control had locus to claim spoliation; restoration of possession and interdiction were granted.
Urgent spoliation (mandament van spolie) – possession by employee sufficient for locus standi – proof of peaceful and undisturbed possession and wrongful deprivation – switching off electricity as spoliation – inadmissibility of unproduced confirmatory affidavits – non‑joinder objection dismissed.
|
26 March 2024 |
|
Minister properly joined as executive authority, but the NDPP/NPA must be joined due to its direct and substantial interest.
* State liability – citation of executive authority – section 2(1) State Liability Act – Minister as nominal defendant.
* Constitutional and statutory framework – section 179 Constitution; National Prosecuting Authority Act – Minister’s concurrence on prosecution policy, salary scales, and departmental accounting.
* Employment and vicarious liability – prosecutor employed by NPA under contract; dual principalship; employer’s direct and substantial interest.
* Joinder and non-joinder – test whether a third party has a direct and substantial interest in orders the court may make.
|
19 March 2024 |
|
The respondent failed to prove public provision of equivalent caregiving; the applicant entitled to lump‑sum caregiving damages.
Delict — damages for future caregiving — entitlement to lump‑sum award; public‑healthcare defence — evidentiary burden to prove equivalent public provision at no/less cost; refusal to develop common law to permit deferred/state‑provided caregiving; contingency deduction rejected.
|
18 March 2024 |
|
Amendment refused: proposed personal‑injury damages lacked Rule 18(10) particularity and would render pleadings excipiable.
Rule 18(10) – Particularity in claims for damages for personal injury; pleadings must state earnings lost to date and how quantum is made up; non‑compliance is prima facie prejudicial and may render pleadings excipiable; post‑notice expert reports do not cure an inadequate notice to amend.
|
5 March 2024 |
| February 2024 |
|
|
An admission offer does not create enforceable registration rights absent payment and available space; applicant failed to prove either.
Contract formation — admission offer subject to suspensive condition of registration fee and capacity; failure to prove payment or frustration — no enforceable right to registration; constitutional right to further education does not guarantee enrolment at a particular institution; motion proceedings require adequate affidavit evidence and a replying affidavit where material disputes exist.
|
27 February 2024 |
|
Supplementary affidavits and a hastily framed Rule 30A notice were procedurally defective and set aside; leave to refile granted.
Practice and procedure — Urgent applications and Rule 12 — readiness of papers when seeking urgency; Further affidavits — limits on filing supplementary affidavits and amendments to affidavits (Rule 28; Rule 6(5)(e)); Rule 30A — enforcement for failure to comply with rules or court directions; Rule 30(1) — setting aside irregular steps where opposing party not afforded opportunity to remove cause of complaint; Timing and procedural compliance required for notices under Rules 30 and 30A.
|
13 February 2024 |
|
Plaintiffs awarded substantial damages for unlawful arrest, detention and degrading assault, including forcible ingestion of dog faeces.
Unlawful arrest and detention – assessment of quantum – assault and degrading treatment – forced ingestion of dog faeces as aggravating factor – racial motive as aggravation – evidentiary consequences where defendant fails to call witnesses or opposing experts – awards for solatium and future medical expenses.
|
1 February 2024 |
| January 2024 |
|
|
Applicant lacked standing to challenge a municipal resolution because a binding consent order governed his employment.
Standing – Superior Courts Act s21(1)(c) – requirement of direct and substantial interest for declaratory relief; Leave to appeal – s17(1)(a) – reasonable prospects of success; Motion proceedings – disputed facts resolved under Plascon‑Evans; Effect of existing consent court order on locus standi to challenge municipal resolutions; Annexures not properly pleaded cannot be relied upon.
|
30 January 2024 |
|
Application to admit late evidence of lobola payment fails; hearsay excluded and appeal dismissed with costs.
* Family law – validity and proprietary consequences of marriage – allegation of prior customary marriage founded on alleged payment of lobola – admissibility of hearsay evidence. * Evidence – hearsay in civil proceedings – Law of Evidence Amendment Act; requirements for admission and the need to call source/declarant. * Appeal – admission of further evidence on appeal – principles (finality, diligence, weight, prejudice). * Mootness – appeal not dismissed solely on mootness where declaratory relief remains distinct.
|
30 January 2024 |
|
Appellant’s extant PTO (until set aside) entitled eviction; counter-claim defective for non-service and failure to seek PAJA review.
* Land tenure – Permission to Occupy (PTO) – PTO remains extant until set aside or cancelled by issuing authority or court. * Administrative law – Challenge to PTO requires service on and review of the issuing state department under PAJA; direct and substantial interest of state. * Eviction – PIE s 4(7) and s 26(3) constitutional balancing of landowner/occupier interests; just and equitable inquiry. * Family/common home claims – interplay between customary/family rights and statutory PTO tenure; evidentiary and locus standi implications.
|
30 January 2024 |
|
|
23 January 2024 |
|
Consent order upheld where applicants failed to plead or prove grounds for rescission and produced no confirmatory affidavits.
Civil procedure – rescission of consent judgments; Rule 42(1) – statutory grounds for rescission; Common law rescission – fraud or justus error required; Necessity of confirmatory affidavits from counsel/instructing attorneys; Finality of judgments; Withdrawal of attorney – procedural obligations under Rule 16 and Joint Rules.
|
23 January 2024 |
|
Court grants eviction where leases expired/terminated, PIE complied with, and respondents raised no bona fide defenses.
Eviction – PIE compliance – termination of leases by effluxion of time/notice; bona fide disputes of fact; Plascon–Evans principle; lessee bound despite lessor’s lack of title; costs including two counsel.
|
23 January 2024 |
|
|
23 January 2024 |
|
Factual admissions in a section 112(2) plea can suffice to prove intention and penetration; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – section 112(2) plea statements – factual averments must support elements of offence; intention may be inferred from facts; admission of penetration by accused; appellate interference limited absent material misdirection.
|
23 January 2024 |
| December 2023 |
|
|
Arrest was lawful because reasonable suspicion of malicious injury (Schedule 1) existed and detention complied with statutory and constitutional limits.
* Criminal procedure – Warrantless arrest – s 40(1)(b) CPA – jurisdictional facts: peace officer, suspicion, Schedule 1 offence, reasonable grounds.
* Malicious injury to property as basis for Schedule 1 arrest where assault charge (Schedule 7) is also present.
* Exercise of police discretion to arrest – standard of rationality and protection of persons from mob violence.
* Detention – distinction between lawfulness of arrest and of detention; compliance with 48‑hour rule and court’s discretion to order continued detention.
|
12 December 2023 |
|
Accused failed to prove exceptional circumstances for bail under section 60(11)(a) for a Schedule 6 offence.
Bail – Schedule 6 offences – s60(11)(a) Criminal Procedure Act – onus on accused to prove exceptional circumstances; ordinary personal circumstances (employment, parenthood) insufficient without more; strength of State case (possession of vehicle, matching fingerprints) and credibility issues relevant to bail refusal.
|
12 December 2023 |
|
A spoliation order can restore possession wrongfully taken by a municipality, but not return property to an unlawful site.
* Property — Mandament van spolie — Possessory remedy — Applicant must prove prior de facto possession and wrongful dispossession.
* Administrative action — Municipality — Impoundment of container — absence of identified statutory authority renders dispossession wrongful.
* Civil remedies — Relief limited by doctrine of legality — court will not order restoration to an unlawful site.
* Evidence — Opposing affidavit by unconnected deponent may be disregarded; ownership not decisive in spoliation proceedings.
|
8 December 2023 |
|
Applicant's self-created urgency led to the urgent application being struck off and costs awarded against the applicant.
Urgency – self-created urgency – failure to respond to demand and omission to seek interim interdict – rescission of taxed bill of costs and allocator – writ of execution and attachment – application struck off roll; costs awarded.
|
6 December 2023 |
|
Applicant failed to establish entitlement to an interdict or permanent declaratory relief; leave to appeal refused with costs.
• Administrative law – traditional leadership – MEC’s statutory powers to enquire into and withdraw recognition of headmen – implications for entitlement to interdict and declaratory relief.
• Civil procedure – requirements for a final interdict: clear right, injury, absence of alternative remedy – failure to establish same.
• Declaratory relief – discretion to grant permanent declarations where statutory review/enquiry mechanisms exist.
• Appeals – leave to appeal refused where no reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons shown.
|
5 December 2023 |