|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| January 2026 |
|
|
Shopkeeper liable for 70% of slip‑and‑fall damages where ramp was too steep, wet and lacked safety features.
Delict — premises liability; duty of care of shopkeeper to customers at entrance ramp — non‑compliant ramp gradient (SANS 400 D), absence of handrails and anti‑slip measures — causation of slip‑and‑fall injury — contributory negligence and apportionment — admissibility and weight of expert slip‑resistance testing.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff proved engineering-career future loss but failed to prove projected professional rugby career; defendant liable for 90%.
Road Accident Fund — quantum of damages — proof of future loss of earning capacity — contested professional-sport career prospect vs engineering-career scenario — actuarial and industrial-psychology evidence; apportionment 90/10; s 17(4)(a) undertaking; costs.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Court refused interim interdict restraining trustees’ transfers, finding no clear right and sales valid under insolvency authorisations.
Insolvency law — interim interdict pendente lite restraining trustees from transferring estate assets — requirements for interlocutory interdict; insolvency practice — trustee powers to sell immovable property prior to second meeting where Master gives permission (s 18(3) read with s 80(bis)); auction law — compliance with auction rules and Consumer Protection Act regulations governing deposits, confirmation period and commissions; locus standi of insolvent/reversionary interests; late affidavits (pro non scripto); alleged conflict of interest under Legal Practice Council rule 58.8.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Applicants failed to show a right to interdict trustees from transferring insolvent estates' property pending a Master's inquiry.
Insolvency law – interim interdict standards – section 152 Master’s powers – sale of assets prior to second meeting (s 18(3)/s 80(bis)/s 82) – auction rules and Consumer Protection Act regulations – trustees’ fiduciary duties and creditors’ directions – locus standi – conflict of interest for practitioners.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Court enforces personal guarantees and settlement agreement; trust resolution authorising guarantee held valid under the trust deed.
Trust law – interpretation of trust deed – written resolutions and round‑robin clauses (clause 8.5) – unanimous written approval for guarantees (clause 8.6.4) – enforceability of guarantees; Contract/public policy – Barkhuizen approach to contractual fairness and enforcement; Credibility and summary judgment – failure to raise bona fide factual dispute.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Court made settlement an order under Rule 41, finding no duress and no breach of s35(12) of the Administration of Estates Act.
Civil procedure – Uniform Rule 41 – settlement reduced to writing and unenforced – application for judgment in terms thereof; Contract law – undue influence and duress – threat to sue/continue litigation not contra bonos mores; Administration of Estates Act s35(12) – distinction between judgment recording a claim and execution against estate; Procedural duty – dominus litis to cite/serve Master; Costs – allocation and scales.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Fraudulent transfers after a lapsed suspensive sale do not pass ownership; transfers set aside and title restored to the victim.
Transfer of immovable property — suspensive condition lapses if not fulfilled — abstract theory requires registration plus valid real agreement — fraud or forged/defective documents prevent ownership passing despite registration — nemo plus iuris: one cannot transfer better title than one has — fraudulent back-to-back transfers set aside; property restored to original owner.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Whether termination without prior demand where no time fixed constitutes repudiation and warrants specific performance.
Urgent application – Rule 6(12) – urgency and absence of substantial redress; Contract law – mora ex persona – where no time fixed interpellatio required; Repudiation – premature termination without demand; Specific performance – ordered where termination invalid and damages inadequate; Arbitration clause – does not oust court’s jurisdiction for urgent relief.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Assessment of future loss of earnings after childhood brain injury; late plea‑amendment/postponement refused, expert reports admitted.
Damages — motor vehicle accident — future loss of earnings; admission of expert affidavits and medico‑legal reports (Rule 38(2) and s3(1) LOEAA); refusal of late application to amend plea/postpone; assessment and application of contingencies in actuarial calculation.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Court awarded R1,100,000 general damages to applicant after accepting unchallenged expert evidence of multiple serious injuries.
Road Accident Fund claim – determination of general damages – acceptance and weight of unchallenged expert reports – assessment of non-patrimonial loss (brain injury, orthopaedic injury, sensorineural hearing loss, neurogenic bladder) – judicial discretion in quantum – costs and interest provisions.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
Provisional liquidation granted where statutory demand was served, payment-arrangement request did not show bona fide dispute, and lis pendens did not apply.
Companies Act — Provisional liquidation — s 344–345 Old Act/schedule 5 of New Act — statutory letter of demand (s 69(1)(a)) — bona fide dispute requirement — lis pendens/lis alibi pendens — amendment of citation following conversion from CC to Pty Ltd — costs in liquidation.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
Head-on collision caused by insured crossing centre line; plaintiff partly negligent, damages apportioned 70/30 in plaintiff's favour.
Road Accident Fund liability – head-on collision – vehicle crossing centre line – contributory negligence for failure to keep proper lookout – apportionment of damages 70/30 – caution in undefended RAF matters.
|
15 January 2026 |
|
Court varied its prior judgment mero motu to correct omission and awarded costs, including counsel on scale B.
Civil procedure – variation of judgment under Uniform Rule 42(1)(b) – mero motu correction of accessory or consequential omissions – costs follow the result – Firestone principle applied.
|
14 January 2026 |
|
Appellant’s condonation for a six‑month late notice of appeal dismissed due to gross non‑compliance and inadequate explanation.
Civil procedure — condonation for late notice of appeal — gross non‑compliance with court rules; defective condonation filed in magistrates’ court (Magistrates’ Courts rule 60(5)(a)); rescission of default judgment — requirement to disclose grounds of defence (Magistrates’ Courts rule 49(3)); prospects of success weighed against delay and prejudice; respondent’s short delay in filing answering affidavit condoned.
|
14 January 2026 |
|
Summary judgment refused where defendants disclosed bona fide triable defences and a substantial counterclaim.
Civil procedure – Summary judgment – Requirement that defendant fully disclose nature, grounds and material facts of a bona fide defence – Illiquidity and absence of annexed price schedule/delivery notes – Certificate of balance and founding affidavit by legal practitioner – Counterclaim for unjustified enrichment.
|
8 January 2026 |
| December 2025 |
|
|
Condonation and leave to appeal refused for inordinate delay, lack of prospects, and absent locus standi.
Civil procedure — condonation for late filing — Melane/Grootboom factors; Leave to appeal — s 17 Superior Courts Act — reasonable prospects of success; Locus standi — effect of final liquidation on director's capacity; Costs — personal costs order (party-and-party).
|
29 December 2025 |
|
A duplicate theft conviction was set aside and the matter remitted for sentencing on the substantive housebreaking count.
Criminal law — Duplication of convictions — Splitting a single substantive offence into multiple counts — Special review under s 116(3) — Setting aside duplicated conviction and remitting for sentencing.
|
19 December 2025 |
|
Condonation for 21-day late statutory notice refused because prospects of success were lacking and state would be prejudiced.
Institution of Legal Proceedings against Certain Organs of State Act s 3(4) – condonation for late notice – conjunctive requirements: no prescription, good cause, no unreasonable prejudice – prospects of success relevant to good cause – malicious arrest, detention and prosecution claims – service on correct organ of state.
|
18 December 2025 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction and life sentence upheld after proper evaluation of evidence and sentencing discretion.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Evaluation of complainant’s credibility and need for caution – Corroboration by sibling and accused’s statement – Sentencing – Substantial and compelling circumstances under S v Malgas – Life imprisonment for rape of a minor by a parent.
|
18 December 2025 |
|
Hospital records and related documentation constituted substantial compliance with s 24, so the Fund's special pleas were dismissed.
Road Accident Fund Act s 24 – procedure for lodging claims – substantial compliance – medical report requirements (s 24(2)(a)) – hospital records as substantial compliance – s 24(5) objection within 60 days – special pleas of non‑compliance, prematurity and prescription dismissed.
|
17 December 2025 |
|
A notice of bar is irregular where the respondent’s attorney’s authority is disputed under rule 7(1) until court determination.
Procedure — Uniform Rules of Court — Rule 7(1): dispute of attorney’s authority — court must be satisfied of authority; filing power of attorney not automatically dispositive. Rule 30: irregular steps — notice of bar set aside. Rule 22(1): 20-day pleading period postponed until court determination of authority.
|
12 December 2025 |
|
Notice of bar served while attorney authority was disputed is irregular; court must be satisfied of authority before further steps.
Civil procedure — Uniform Rules of Court — Rule 7(1) — disputed authority of attorney — court must be satisfied of authority before attorney may act; production of power of attorney or interlocutory proceeding may be required. Civil procedure — Rule 30 — irregular steps — setting aside notice of bar served while authority disputed. Civil procedure — Rule 22(1) — time for plea/exception runs from day after court determines authority.
|
12 December 2025 |
|
Contempt application failed because the municipality’s non‑compliance was not proved willful or mala fide beyond reasonable doubt.
Civil contempt — consent order — requirements: existence, service, non‑compliance, willfulness and mala fides beyond reasonable doubt — Plascon‑Evans evidential approach — settlement as court order does not per se bar other remedies — practical impediments to performance (encumbrances, bond terms, costs) may raise reasonable doubt.
|
11 December 2025 |
|
Contempt not proved beyond reasonable doubt; maintenance and related disputes referred to the Maintenance Court, each party to bear own costs.
Maintenance orders – contempt of court – requirements of existence, service, disobedience, wilfulness and mala fides – Plascon‑Evans rule – financial incapacity and change of circumstances – referral to Maintenance Court under Maintenance Act – best interests of children and inappropriate use of High Court to resolve parental acrimony.
|
9 December 2025 |
|
Genuine factual disputes on existence and terms of an alleged partnership required referral to oral evidence; late reply condoned.
Civil procedure – motion proceedings vs action – material disputes of fact – Rule 6(5)(g) referral to oral evidence; Partnership law – requirements for (universal/ordinary) partnership between spouses married out of community; Admissibility of new evidence in reply – introduction of bank statement (annexure "ISA 08") and discretionary grant of leave to file further affidavit.
|
5 December 2025 |
|
Whether RAF breached judgment by failing to pay interest and taxed costs and whether contempt orders should be enforced.
Road Accident Fund — failure to pay interest and taxed costs under judgment — typographical/identity‑number error in pleadings — bona fide clerical mistake — contempt proceedings against CEO and execution of suspended sentence — rescission application to set aside prior orders — costs.
|
5 December 2025 |
|
Failure to appear on bail is a statutory offence under s67A requiring a formal charge and trial; summary inquiry impermissible.
Criminal Procedure Act s67A – failure to appear on bail – statutory offence – requirement for formal charge-sheet and full trial – summary inquiry impermissible – State to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
5 December 2025 |
|
Court applied a 10% post‑morbid contingency and awarded the plaintiff R283,756 for future loss of earnings.
Road Accident Fund – quantum – future loss of earnings – contingency deductions – admissibility of uncontested expert and actuarial evidence – court’s discretionary assessment based on claimant’s personal circumstances.
|
5 December 2025 |
|
The applicant was partly negligent; the respondent liable for 75% of proven damages.
Road traffic negligence – two-lane straight road – potholes causing oncoming heavy vehicle to veer across centre line – weight of witness estimates and photographs – duty of driver on correct side to take reasonable evasive action – sudden emergency principle considered – apportionment of damages 75/25 in favour of plaintiff.
|
3 December 2025 |
|
Court dismissed review of Master's withdrawal of s18(3) letters, directing Chief Master to review under s95.
Administration of Estates Act – section 18(3) small estates procedure – issuance and withdrawal of letters of authority; section 95 Chief Master's review as primary remedy; inapplicability of section 54 to section 18(3) representatives; duty to disclose assets and descendants; potential need for executor dative.
|
3 December 2025 |
| November 2025 |
|
|
Majority shareholder validly removed a co-director under s 71; court confirmed resolution and ordered bank to unfreeze account.
Companies Act s 71 – removal of director – notice and opportunity to be heard required; Motion procedure – supplementary affidavits require leave – Uniform Rule 6; Lis pendens and CIPC proceedings – record-keeping role of CIPC; Urgent relief to unfreeze company bank account.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal granted on whether large‑scale money‑laundering proceeds may be restrained and confiscated under POCA.
Criminal procedure — Restraint orders under POCA — Whether extensive money‑laundering proceeds (c. R522m) are sufficiently related to charged offences (s 18(1)(c)) to be restrained/confiscated; presumption in s 22(3) POCA; interplay with business rescue and release of restrained property; leave to appeal to SCA.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Applicant proved dangerous U‑turn but was 20% contributorily negligent; respondent liable for 80%.
Road Accident Fund Act s 24 — substantial compliance with RAF1 claim form — special pleas dismissed where respondent failed to place facta probantia or agree a stated case; Evidence — single witness inconsistencies and evaluation on probabilities; Delict — dangerous U‑turn as cause; contributory negligence and apportionment (80/20); costs (merits, inclusive of counsel on scale B).
|
27 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal dismissed—municipal council unlawfully terminated employment in breach of contract and natural justice.
Judicial review – leave to appeal refused – municipal council’s termination of senior manager unlawful and invalid for breach of employment contract and audi alteram partem; High Court jurisdiction for legality review not ousted by CCMA clause; procedural irregularities immaterial or correctable.
|
27 November 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to prove fitness for readmission, attacked a long-standing striking-off order; application dismissed with costs.
Readmission as attorney — onus to prove genuine, complete and permanent reformation — trust account mismanagement and outstanding AFF liabilities — attacking prior striking-off order after long delay — conduct in proceedings and lack of candour.
|
27 November 2025 |
|
Applicant’s proposed amendment refused because draft particulars were vague on instalments and interest, causing prejudice.
Civil procedure — Amendment of pleadings (Rule 28) — Judicial discretion and Moolman principles — Delay and trial‑related prejudice — Pleadings must comply with Rule 18: clear, concise and particular statement of material facts — Interest claims and alleged withdrawal of admissions — Rectification of contract schedules and annexures.
|
26 November 2025 |
|
Application to compel municipal invoice payment dismissed due to lis pendens and abuse of process; punitive costs awarded.
Administrative law – Mandamus under s 65(2)(e) MFMA – lis pendens – abuse of process for failing to disclose pending action – pending action between same parties and same cause bars subsequent proceedings.
|
25 November 2025 |
|
Applicants failed to show reasonable prospects of success against a summary judgment; leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – s 17(1)(a)(i) Superior Courts Act – test of reasonable prospects of success; Summary judgment – bona fide defence and triable issue; Affidavits – sufficiency of deponent’s personal knowledge; Corporate deponent may rely on company records; Rees v Investec Bank considered; Validity of section 129 notices.
|
25 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: settlement order confined disputes to accounting issues and bars relitigation of the agreement’s legality.
Civil procedure — settlement agreement made an order of court — interpretation of settlement terms — scope limited to accounting/debatement disputes — settlement order estops relitigation of settled substantive claims; leave to appeal requires reasonable prospects of success.
|
24 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: no reasonable prospects of success or compelling reason to disturb costs and urgency rulings.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – Superior Courts Act s 17(1) – requirement of reasonable prospect of success or compelling reason; costs orders – trial court’s wide discretion and appellate reluctance to interfere; urgency – criteria for enrollment on urgent roll and removal from urgent roll.
|
24 November 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to show reasonable prospects or compelling reasons to appeal removal from urgent roll and costs order.
Civil procedure — Leave to appeal — Section 17(1) Superior Courts Act — reasonable prospects of success threshold — removal from urgent roll — discretion as to costs — absence of misdirection or compelling reasons.
|
24 November 2025 |
|
s319 reservation dismissed: proposed questions were factual, insufficiently particular, or would have no practical effect on acquittals.
Criminal procedure — s 319 CPA — reservation of questions of law — strict requirements: accurate framing, factual basis in record, practical effect on acquittal — distinction between law and fact — best evidence rule and admissibility of documents — adverse inferences and duty to call witnesses (s 186) — adequacy of reasons and findings (s 146A; s 34 Constitution).
|
21 November 2025 |
|
Negligent travel-claim error, not proven deliberate dishonesty, did not render applicant unfit to be admitted as a legal practitioner.
Admission to the roll — fitness to practise — dismissal for gross dishonesty arising from negligent travel-claim error — disclosure obligations — negligence versus deliberate dishonesty — remorse/admission of guilt not prerequisite where innocence maintained.
|
20 November 2025 |
|
A negligent, inadvertent travel-claim error did not amount to deliberate dishonesty and did not bar admission as a legal practitioner.
Admission as legal practitioner – fit and proper person inquiry – prior disciplinary dismissal for gross dishonesty – negligent error vs deliberate dishonesty – disclosure obligations and requirement to admit guilt/remorse – costs where respondent acts as custos morum.
|
20 November 2025 |
|
Renewed bail application failed: alleged new facts insufficient under s60(11)(b); appeal dismissed.
Criminal procedure — Bail — Renewed bail application based on alleged new facts — Meaning and limits of "new facts" — Section 60(11)(b) interests of justice — Evidence known but not previously presented — Appellate review of magistrate's discretion under s65(4).
|
20 November 2025 |
|
Condonation of late notice under Act 40 of 2002 granted; each party ordered to pay their own costs.
Condonation – Institution of Legal Proceedings against Certain Organs of State Act 40 of 2002 s 3(1) – unopposed condonation on merits – costs: punitive (attorney and client) costs not warranted; where delay adequately explained and no prejudice, each party often to pay own costs.
|
20 November 2025 |
|
Urgency refused and application struck from the roll because the applicant created its own urgency; costs awarded to the respondent.
Urgent application — self-created urgency — Rule 6(12) Uniform Rules — interim interdict to restrain municipal enforcement of by-law — pendente lite constitutional challenge.
|
19 November 2025 |
|
A PAJA review brought after 180 days without s9 condonation is incompetent and dismissed; estate ordered to pay costs.
Administrative law — PAJA s7 (180-day time limit) — PAJA s9 (extension/condonation) — inordinate delay — interest of justice — review application dismissed as time-barred.
|
17 November 2025 |
|
Court applies a 20% contingency deduction to future loss of earnings from a knee injury; RAF ordered to pay R824,200.
Damages — personal injury — assessment of future loss of earnings — contingency deduction — municipal employment context, occupational and industrial psychological evidence, knee injury prognosis — 20% contingency deduction applied; RAF liable for general and future loss; past medicals postponed.
|
14 November 2025 |