|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| March 2023 |
|
|
Urgent relief granted: 18 October shareholders’ meeting invalid; purported director removals void ab initio; municipality’s intervention refused.
Companies Act — shareholders’ meeting — authority to convene and proper notice — meeting invalid where convening lacked authority and notice not given to all shareholders; corporate takeover — purported removal/election of directors void ab initio; urgency — abridgment of rules justified where imminent prejudice and inability to obtain adequate redress in due course; intervention — municipality lacks direct and substantial interest to intervene in private company internal dispute.
|
31 March 2023 |
|
Pleadings that allege ‘unlawful’ (negligent) prosecution cannot substitute for actio iniuriarum; absolution granted for failure to prima facie prove malicious prosecution.
Criminal procedure and delict – unlawful/negligent prosecution versus malicious prosecution – limits on a delictual claim by accused for ordinary negligence by prosecutors/police; absolution from the instance where no prima facie case for malicious prosecution is shown; pleadings must properly define whether reliance is on malice (actio iniuriarum) or unlawful/negligent prosecution.
|
28 March 2023 |
|
An urgent ex parte application to halt the transfer of estate property failed for lack of true urgency and proper notice.
Civil procedure – urgent applications – ex parte relief – requirements for urgency – proper notice – estate administration – sale of estate assets – interim interdict – self-created urgency – respect for court procedures and respondents’ rights.
|
22 March 2023 |
|
Applicant entitled to interdict for passing off: FIRELOGIK deceptively similar to and likely to be confused with FIRE LOGIC.
Passing off – requirement of distinctiveness/reputation; deceptive similarity of trade names (visual and phonetic) – likelihood of confusion; interdictory relief where likelihood of deception and likely loss; descriptive vs fancy names; interlocutory strike-out – unsubstantiated hearsay and costs.
|
17 March 2023 |
|
Exception partially upheld: cancellation claim stands; rei vindicatio defective; actio ad exhibendum need not plead mala fides.
Civil procedure — exception to particulars of claim — meaning and ambit of averments on exception; factual disputes not resolved on exception. Contract law — domicilium clause and service — nominated domicilium not necessarily peremptory; service on attorneys may suffice where notice comes to addressee's attention. Property law — rei vindicatio — claimant must allege defendant was in possession when action instituted. Delict/condictio — actio ad exhibendum — claimant need not plead mala fides as separate element; must show disposer acted with dolus or culpa and knew claimant's ownership.
|
16 March 2023 |
|
High Court had concurrent jurisdiction to hear constitutional-rights based interdiction arising from strike conduct; jurisdiction assessed by pleadings.
Labour law; jurisdiction — s 157 LRA — concurrent jurisdiction of High Court and Labour Court where alleged or threatened infringement of constitutional rights arising from employment; jurisdiction determined by pleadings (Gcaba/Baloyi); s 68 LRA interdicts reserved to Labour Court.
|
15 March 2023 |
|
"Our children" in a clear joint will includes children born out of wedlock unless the will’s context excludes them.
Wills – interpretation – joint will – "our children" includes children born out of wedlock absent contextual indication to exclude them (s 2D Wills Act); extrinsic evidence inadmissible to vary clear testamentary language; latent ambiguity and admissibility of background facts; relief for unsuccessful postponement where undertakings and court rules breached.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
Respondent must prove lawfulness of admitted warrantless arrest; failure to do so renders detention unlawful and damages payable.
Warrantless arrest – onus on arresting party to prove jurisdictional facts; Resolution of mutually destructive versions – application of SFW technique; Credibility findings and probabilities; Adverse inference for failure to call available witness (police van driver); Damages for unlawful arrest impairing dignity.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
Appellate court upheld conviction on reliable identification and possession evidence but reduced an excessive 15-year sentence to seven years.
Criminal law – identification evidence – greatest care required where conviction depends on identification – corroboration by circumstantial evidence and possession of stolen property.* Criminal law – single witness – evidence requiring caution but admissible when corroborated.* Criminal procedure – appellate review – deference to trial court factual findings unless plainly wrong.* Sentencing – appeal against sentence – interference only where material misdirection or disproportionate/shocking term – substitution of sentence where necessary.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
Circumstantial evidence and an admission upheld a murder conviction despite identification misdirection; sentence reduced for excessiveness.
Criminal law – circumstantial evidence – conviction on circumstantial proof and admission; Identification evidence – single-witness identification and requirement of caution and assessment of reliability; Credibility – assessment of potentially biased witness (ex-wife) and application of Dhlumayo principles; Sentencing – interference where trial court misdirects by over-emphasising aggravation, failing to account for pre-trial custody, intoxication, and cumulative effect; Substitution and antedating of sentence.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: account-closure dispute is contractual, not a reviewable administrative action; Forum not a tribunal.
Banking law — termination of banking relationship — whether decision by private bank to close accounts is reviewable or a contractual matter; application of Jockey Club cases and Bredenkamp; role of Banks Conduct Standard (reasons and notice); requirements for leave to appeal under s 17 of the Superior Courts Act.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
Defendant failed to establish a bona fide defence to summary judgment after pleadings admitted a latent defect and inadequately pleaded warranty defence.
Civil procedure – Summary judgment – amended rule 14(3)(b) – defendant must disclose fully the nature and grounds of a bona fide defence and material facts relied upon. Sale of goods – latent defect – seed build-up in dispensing shoot of planter; seller's residual obligation not to sell defective goods. Pleading – requirements for pleading a warranty defence and particularity where modification of goods is alleged.
|
14 March 2023 |
|
State failed to prove rape beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable child evidence and neutral medical and corroborative defence evidence.
Criminal law – sexual offences – assessment of young child complainant’s evidence – material inconsistencies and suggestibility; Medical evidence – neutral/inconclusive where injuries have alternative causes; Evidence assessment – not to compartmentalise state and defence cases; Standard of proof – conviction only where guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt; Van der Meyden principle applied to determine reasonable possibility of innocence.
|
13 March 2023 |
|
Accused’s late remorse and personal circumstances insufficient to justify departure from minimum life sentences for two rapes of a blind elderly victim.
Criminal law – sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act s51(1) – substantial and compelling circumstances; section 112(2) plea and weight of guilty plea/remorse; vulnerable victim (physically disabled/elderly) and multiple rapes; Zinn triad sentencing analysis.
|
10 March 2023 |
|
A magistrate’s condonation order is challengeable on review only for conduct‑based gross irregularity, not as administrative action under PAJA.
Administrative law – PAJA – judicial functions excluded: decisions of judicial officers are not "administrative action". Superior Courts Act s22 – review of Magistrates' Court proceedings limited to absence of jurisdiction, bias, gross irregularity, and evidentiary errors. Gross irregularity – must relate to the method/conduct preventing a fair trial, not mere erroneous outcome or error of law on the merits. Procedural finality/time‑bar – challenges to the correctness of a dismissal for non‑compliance are appeal issues, not reviewable as administrative irregularity.
|
2 March 2023 |