|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| August 2011 |
|
|
A bus passenger is entitled to damages for physical and psychiatric injuries, including probable future surgery and therapy.
Delict – Road accident – quantum assessment of general damages for physical and psychiatric injury; Psychiatric injury – bystander/non-relative can claim for chronic PTSD where harm reasonably foreseeable and proved; Future medical expenses – award based on probabilistic expert opinion of likely future surgery; Causation – expert evidence preferred over speculative pre-existing causes.
|
16 August 2011 |
| July 2011 |
|
|
Disciplinary proceedings were instituted on reasonable and probable cause; malicious prosecution and personality-rights claims dismissed.
Delict – Malicious prosecution and abuse of civil proceedings – requirement of a prosecution for malicious criminal prosecution; disciplinary proceedings examined under reasonable and probable cause test (subjective honest belief and objective reasonableness) – circumstantial evidence and investigator onduct – claims for invasion of privacy, dignity and fama inadequately pleaded or proved.
|
5 July 2011 |
| June 2011 |
|
|
Applicant proved multiple contempts: using confidential designs and circumventing an interdict via intermediaries; suspended sentences and fines imposed.
Contempt of court – civil contempt for disobedience of interdict – requisites: existence of order, service, non-compliance and wilfulness/mala fides – onus and evidentiary shift where knowledge and non-compliance proved. Use of confidential information and designs – manufacture and supply of similar products despite cosmetic differences constitutes breach. Circumvention – interposition of intermediaries and participation in inspections constitute indirect contact/solicitation in breach of interdict. Legal advice defence – equivocal or post hoc advice insufficient to negate dolus eventualis. Remedies – suspended imprisonment for individuals, fine for close corporation, and adverse costs (including attorney-and-client).
|
15 June 2011 |
|
Eviction by an organ of state dismissed for procedural defects, factual disputes and being not just and equitable under section 26.
Eviction — s26 Constitution & PIE — just and equitable inquiry (elderly, children, alternative accommodation); Motion proceedings — genuine dispute of fact (Plascon‑Evans) defeats final relief; Procedural compliance — Rule 6/Rule 17(4)(b) requires description/authority of juristic applicant; Contract — eviction not an express remedy, implications only if necessary; Organ of state landlord considerations.
|
14 June 2011 |
| May 2011 |
|
|
Reported
An execution creditor may not use Rule 31(5)(d) to confirm and 'fireproof' a registrar's default judgment declaring immovable property executable.
Civil procedure – Execution against immovable property – Registrar’s power under Rule 31(5) to grant default judgment and declare property executable – Post-Gundwana challenge to past registrar orders – Use (and misuse) of Rule 31(5)(d) to set matters down for reconsideration. Constitutional law – Impact of Gundwana v Steko Development CC on prior registrar orders and rescission remedies. Inherent jurisdiction – limits on court’s power to validate registrar’s orders. Procedure – requirement that set-downs for reconsideration be on notice to other parties.
|
31 May 2011 |
| April 2011 |
|
|
Reported
Court held police must assess and inform prosecutors if no grounds exist for continued detention; particulars of claim not excipiable.
Constitutional law – detention and freedom – s 12 right against arbitrary detention; duty of police to assess necessity of continued detention and to inform prosecutor; duty of prosecutor to acquaint with docket and place reasons for further detention before court; exception – particulars of claim sufficiently plead triable delictual cause of action.
|
2 April 2011 |
|
The first defendant held liable for negligent breach of duty causing a cash-in-transit loss; insurance did not bar plaintiff's claim.
Delict — Negligence of security personnel during cash-in-transit delivery; legal duty to prevent harm; factual and legal causation; collateral source rule — insurer's indemnity does not necessarily reduce plaintiff's claim; defenses: sudden emergency, employer contribution.
|
1 April 2011 |
| March 2011 |
|
|
Plaintiff entitled to damages where the insured driver entered a robot-controlled intersection on red; plaintiff not negligent.
Road Accident Fund – liability under s 17 – collision at robot-controlled intersection – vehicle entering on red signal held negligent. Credibility – assessment of eyewitness evidence; preference for plaintiff and police witness over insured driver and passenger. Duty of care – driver with green signal not obliged to anticipate unlawful red-light entrants; contributory negligence not established. Costs – defendant ordered to pay taxed costs pertaining to merits (including one inspection in loco) with interest; quantum postponed sine die.
|
29 March 2011 |
| February 2011 |
|
|
A municipality’s failure to implement its pavement maintenance procedures was wrongful and culpable, entitling the appellant to damages.
Municipal liability for omissions; pavements maintenance; wrongfulness determined by legal convictions of the community; distinction between wrongfulness and culpa; application of Kruger v Coetzee; negligent implementation of maintenance procedures v. system design.
|
17 February 2011 |
|
Intermittent incapacitating seizures and frontal-lobe damage justified appointment of a curator ad litem to protect the plaintiff’s litigation capacity.
Curator ad litem — capacity to litigate — frontal lobe injury, seizures and fluctuating cognition may necessitate curator despite gainful employment; Rule 57 procedural requirements not peremptory; costs — applicant to nominate curator; appointment safeguards to protect litigation integrity.
|
1 February 2011 |