|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2024 |
|
|
Court ordered Master to accept a non-compliant will under s2(3) after finding testamentary intention and capacity.
Wills Act s2(3) – rescue power to validate non-compliant wills; testamentary intention and capacity – sufficiency of corroborating surrounding circumstances and witness evidence; priority of maintenance obligations of estate over bequests; formalities and signature defects remedied by court order.
|
31 October 2024 |
|
Rescission refused: unilateral mistake and failure to plead statutory defences precluded setting aside the consent orders.
Civil procedure – Rescission of judgment – Rule 42(1) – common mistake v. unilateral mistake – failure to raise special plea at pleading stage – statutory defences (s24(5) objection; s23(1) prescription) insufficient for rescission.
|
31 October 2024 |
|
Loss of trust alone cannot justify removal of an executrix; applicant failed to prove maladministration or forgery.
Administration of estates – removal of executor – s 54(1)(a)(v) – discretionary power exercised in the interests of estate and beneficiaries; Role of the Master – supervisory duty to protect creditors, heirs and legatees; Standard of proof – allegations must be established on a balance of probabilities; Loss of trust/confidence – insufficient alone to justify removal absent evidence of maladministration or abuse; Allegation of forged nomination – requires substantiation to set aside appointment.
|
30 October 2024 |
|
Medical aid payments do not reduce RAF liability; court quantified past medicals, loss of earnings and general damages and ordered s17(4)(a) undertaking.
Road Accident Fund — quantum assessment; medical-aid benefits not deductible from RAF liability; valuation of past and future loss of earnings/earning capacity (actuarial assumptions and contingencies); general damages for traumatic brain injury and sequelae; section 17(4)(a) undertaking; costs including expert fees.
|
30 October 2024 |
|
Unreasonable delay and failure to seek arbitrator correction precluded court granting or correcting arbitration cost orders.
Arbitration — Arbitration Act 42 of 1965 — s30 (arbitrator may correct clerical mistake/patent error) and s31 (making award order of Court and Court’s power to correct before doing so) — requirement of existing award for correction — patent error standard — requirement to approach arbitrator timeously — delay and Rule 42(1)(b) principle of reasonable time — finality of arbitration awards s28 and res judicata — taxation of arbitration costs requires court order.
|
29 October 2024 |
|
Court orders respondent to maintain child’s medical cover and pay child maintenance; spousal maintenance and legal-costs claim dismissed.
Family law – Rule 43 application for pendente lite relief – child maintenance, medical aid and day-care costs – spousal maintenance and legal-costs contribution – duty of full financial disclosure – referral to Family Advocate for investigation of care and contact.
|
25 October 2024 |
|
The plaintiff awarded R6,018,475 for a minor’s severe brain injury; expert evidence and actuarial contingencies accepted.
Motor-vehicle collision – paediatric severe traumatic brain injury – quantification of general damages and future loss of earnings – acceptance of uncontested expert evidence – actuarial approach and contingency deductions (25% but-for; 70% post-morbid) – trust for minor – s 17(4) RAF undertaking – costs (experts and senior counsel).
|
25 October 2024 |
|
|
25 October 2024 |
|
Set-off applies only to liquidated reciprocal debts; unjustified-payment reconvention allowed, salary-recovery claim unsustainable.
Civil procedure – amendment of plea – amendment refused where it renders plea excipiable; Set-off – limited to reciprocal liquidated debts; Enrichment/unjustified payment – reconvention permissible where prerequisites pleaded; No basis to claim third-party employment salaries without legal entitlement.
|
25 October 2024 |
|
Application for condonation and leave to appeal dismissed due to lack of reasonable prospect of success.
Civil procedure – application for condonation and leave to appeal – raised threshold for granting leave – reasonable prospects of success required.
|
25 October 2024 |
|
|
24 October 2024 |
|
Summary judgment granted only for equipment return; monetary claim dismissed due to disputes over commencement, suspensive condition and damages.
Summary judgment – delivery of specified movable property – appropriate for return of equipment where tender made. Summary judgment – liquidated monetary claim – refused where commencement date, initial term and suspensive condition in contract are uncertain and damages cannot be reliably quantified. Contract – suspensive condition (personal guarantee) – fulfilment/waiver must be pleaded and proved. Defence – bona fide defence disclosed relating to alleged insufficiency of equipment and contractual allocation of supplier liability. Civil procedure – discretion to refuse summary judgment where interpretation of contract and factual disputes require trial.
|
22 October 2024 |
|
Court declares municipal financial and service‑delivery failures constitutional breaches and orders mandatory s139 intervention and a recovery plan.
Constitutional law; local government – municipal obligations under ss 152(2) and 153(a) – serious or persistent material breach due to financial crisis; s139(5) mandatory provincial intervention; s139(7) national intervention where provincial executive fails; MFMA triggers for financial crisis; structural interdictory relief and recovery plan; possible dissolution and appointment of administrator.
|
22 October 2024 |
|
|
22 October 2024 |
|
Late expert disclosure breaching Rule 36(9)(a) justified removal from the roll and costs against the plaintiff.
Rule 36(9)(a) – expert notice and summary – amended time limits – late expert disclosure precludes expert evidence and entitles opponent to postponement; wasted costs normally borne by party at fault; distinction between party‑and‑party and punitive costs where non‑compliance arises from neglect rather than dishonesty.
|
22 October 2024 |
|
Appointment lacking required recruitment and HR records was unlawful; employment contract set aside and costs awarded.
Employment law/administrative procedure – Appointment of political staff – Requirement that appointments linked to the term of the Legislature follow recruitment, selection and verification processes and be recorded with Secretary to Legislature – Absence of documentary or HR records renders contract unlawful and liable to be set aside; condonation for late answering affidavit refused.
|
21 October 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where AOD held a regulated credit agreement and a novel NCA interpretation was first raised on appeal.
Insolvency — provisional sequestration — liquid claim — Acknowledgement of Debt — whether AOD constitutes a regulated credit agreement under section 8 of the NCA; interpretation of NCA (purposive v literal) — novel issue first raised on appeal; bona fide dispute as bar to sequestration; condonation discretion.
|
21 October 2024 |
|
Motion proceedings – No case made out in founding affidavit.n proceedings – No case made out in founding affidavit
|
21 October 2024 |
|
Court set aside trial finding of novus actus, honoured parties' settlement and referred quantum to actuaries with specified contingencies.
Road Accident Fund; compromise between parties; enforceability of pre-trial settlement; admissible expert reports as common cause; trial court exceeded agreed ambit; resignation as alleged novus actus; assessment of contingencies; referral to actuary; costs on Scale B.
|
18 October 2024 |
|
Oral, late postponement refused and rescission of a final sequestration order dismissed for procedural and substantive defects.
Insolvency — sequestration — rescission of final sequestration order — s 149(2) Insolvency Act — requirement to serve rescission application on trustee, creditors and the Master — common‑law grounds for rescission (reasonable explanation, bona fides, prima facie defence) — postponement — requirements and discretionary considerations (timeliness, satisfactory explanation, prejudice, public interest, prospects of success) — rule 42(1) not a vehicle to rehear merits.
|
17 October 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal granted where another court may reach different conclusion on enforceability of surviving spouse’s habitatio claim.
• Civil procedure — Leave to appeal — s 17(1)(a) Superior Courts Act — appeal to be granted only if reasonable prospects of success or other compelling reason.
• Succession — liquidation and distribution account — Master's decision setting aside objections — whether executor must amend account to reflect surviving spouse’s claim for loss of habitatio.
• Succession/Maintenance — enforceability of a surviving spouse’s habitatio claim and relation to Maintenance of Surviving Spouses Act s 2.
|
17 October 2024 |
|
Whether unilateral removal from the roll without tendering costs entitles the applicant to costs under Rule 41(1)(c).
Rule 41(1)(c) – Withdrawal/removal from roll – Costs consequences where no consent to pay costs embodied in notice; interpretation of 'withdrawal' to include 'removal'; party-and-party costs awarded where no punitive costs justified; Free State practice directions and authorities applied.
|
17 October 2024 |
|
Inadequately pleaded constitutional applications by an incarcerated litigant were dismissed as vague, factually disputed and procedurally inappropriate.
- Constitutional and administrative law – prisoners’ rights – motion proceedings must plead clear facts; rights of prisoners are entrenched but subject to limitation; declaratory relief unnecessary where rights are apparent.
- Civil procedure – application versus action – Plascon-Evans rule applies where there are genuine disputes of fact; motion proceedings inappropriate for contested factual disputes.
- Correctional services – searches and seizure – allegations of unlawful seizure and degrading searches require solid evidentiary basis; courts cannot order return of items or recordings not shown to be in respondents’ custody.
- Access to justice – court will not compel organs or Legal Aid to perform acts beyond mandate; procedural rules are not routinely relaxed absent compelling justification.
- Costs – in constitutional litigation against the state unsuccessful applicants ordinarily are not mulcted with costs (Biowatch principle).
|
17 October 2024 |
|
An applicant can prove indebtedness under a guarantee by uncontradicted corporate evidence and a manager-signed certificate.
Guarantee and cession – evidentiary value of corporate witness familiar with documents – prima facie proof by written cession instruments and certificate of balance – non-party guarantor cannot challenge cession validity – costs on attorney-and-client scale upheld.
|
17 October 2024 |
|
Court awards R1.7m general damages, applies 20% contingency and orders trust and RAF s17 undertaking.
• Road Accident Fund – quantification of general damages for permanent orthopaedic and amputation injuries – award of R1,700,000.• Loss of earning capacity – actuarial calculation accepted; plaintiff found unemployable.• Contingency deduction – application of 20% (sliding-scale principle) to future loss.• Protection of capital – creation of trust, interim R150,000 payment, trustee fees and trust governance.• RAF s17(4)(a) undertaking – future medical/rehabilitation and trust establishment/administration costs.
|
17 October 2024 |
|
The plaintiff recovered past medical expenses and lost earnings; the court applied 31.5% and 30% contingency deductions.
Road Accident Fund – quantum – recovery of past hospital and medical expenses from RAF; contingency deductions for loss of earnings (31.5% and 30% applied); proof of future earning capacity and use of expert evidence; costs on High Court Scale B including qualifying expert fees.
|
16 October 2024 |
|
|
15 October 2024 |
|
|
11 October 2024 |
|
|
4 October 2024 |
|
Whether a pending review is an alternative remedy affecting entitlement to an interim interdict and leave to appeal.
Interdicts — interim relief pending review — whether pending review (and anticipated disciplinary hearing) constitutes alternative remedy; constitutional rights (s 33(1), s 10) and prospects of success on review; leave to appeal under s 17(1) Superior Courts Act; conflicting authority (Ithala v Constitutional Court dicta).
|
3 October 2024 |
|
Condonation of early service under the Act does not prevent s5(3) deeming and resulting prescription against the plaintiff.
Civil procedure – Prescription against organs of state – Institution of Legal Proceedings Against Certain Organs of State Act 40 of 2002 – s3 notice requirement; s5(2) 60‑day prohibition on serving process; s5(3) deeming provision – effect of condonation on prescription – court held s5(3) mandatory and condonation does not negate its operation; special plea of prescription upheld.
|
3 October 2024 |
|
Appeal against murder conviction and mandatory life sentences dismissed; evidence corroboration and absence of substantial and compelling circumstances upheld.
Criminal law – Murder – Evaluation of witness credibility and corroboration; medico-legal evidence – Post-mortem confirming blunt force injuries; Sentencing – Mandatory life sentence under s 51(1) of Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997; appellate review – interference only if sentencing court erred in finding no substantial and compelling circumstances (Bailey v S).
|
3 October 2024 |
|
Trustee‑shareholders may obtain interim interdicts and pursue derivative relief to prevent director’s misappropriation of company funds.
Companies law – derivative actions and interim relief under s 165 – shareholders of a related company may seek interim interdicts to protect company assets; interim ex parte orders reviewable on return date; rule against reflective loss mitigated where wrongdoers control the company; locus standi; interim monitoring of bank account; limits on granting relief for non‑parties (whistle‑blower).
|
3 October 2024 |
|
Condonation granted and State given leave to appeal several sentences for large-scale fraud and tax/VAT offences involving municipal funds.
Criminal law – s310A appeal by State – condonation for late submissions – sentencing review – appellate interference where sentence vitiated by misdirection or disturbingly inappropriate – aggregation of multiple VAT/tax counts for sentencing undesirable where statutory penalties apply per count – fraud against municipal funds; confiscation order distinct from punishment.
|
3 October 2024 |
|
A credible single child witness supported a rape conviction; no substantial and compelling circumstances justified departing from life imprisonment.
Evidence – single child witness – cautionary approach (Woji; S v Dyira) and trial court credibility findings (R v Dhlumayo). Criminal law – rape of a person under 16 – mandatory life sentence; substantial and compelling circumstances required to depart from minimum (S v Malgas). Sentencing – absence of physical injuries not a mitigating factor (s 51(3)(a)). Appellate review – reluctance to interfere with trial court’s factual findings unless misdirection or striking inappropriateness of sentence.
|
1 October 2024 |
|
Conviction for rape upheld; life sentence set aside—no grievous bodily harm; 15-year sentence imposed.
Criminal law – Rape – Single-witness evidence and application of cautionary rule; Grievous bodily harm – meaning and medical evidence required to engage s51(1) CLAA; Sentencing – distinction between s51(1) and s51(2) CLAA and assessment of substantial and compelling circumstances; Fair trial – postponement/refusal and procedural fairness.
|
1 October 2024 |
| September 2024 |
|
|
A restraint of trade clause protecting an employer’s confidential information and customer relations was upheld and enforced against a former employee.
Restraint of trade – enforceability – employee with access to confidential information and client lists – protection of legitimate proprietary interests – standards for reasonableness and public policy – risk of disclosure – interim and final interdicts.
|
30 September 2024 |
|
An applicant's RAF loss-of-earnings claim prescribed; the respondent's payments/offers did not interrupt prescription.
Road Accident Fund Act s23(3) – prescription of claims; Prescription Act s14 inapplicable to RAF claims; acknowledgements/offers do not interrupt RAF prescription; replication may not introduce new causes to avoid prescription; post-hearing amendments ineffective to cure prescription.
|
26 September 2024 |
|
A minor passenger proved the insured driver’s negligence on probabilities; appeal allowed and respondent held 100% liable.
Road Accident Fund — passenger minor fell from open-backed bakkie — mutually destructive versions; evaluation of probabilities and credibility; duty of care where driver aware or ought to have been aware of passengers in load bay; belated and inconsistent defensive reliance on canvas obstructing view; passenger claimant need only establish minimal negligence.
|
26 September 2024 |
|
Late rescission refused where appointee failed to explain default and had authority/access to the municipal financial information sought.
Civil procedure – rescission and condonation – requirements for condonation and rescission under Uniform Rules 31(2)(b) and 42 and common law – need for full and honest explanation and bona fide defence with prima facie prospects of success. Municipal law – section 139(5) intervention – powers and duties of a lead provincial EXCO representative regarding financial oversight and access to municipal bank information. Default judgment – when a judgment is not 'erroneously granted' where relevant facts were before the court and service was effected at the respondent's place of employment.
|
26 September 2024 |
|
Applicant failed to prove respondent wilfully and mala fide breached maintenance orders; contempt application dismissed.
Civil contempt — maintenance orders — requirement to prove order, service, non‑compliance, wilfulness and mala fides beyond reasonable doubt; once order, service and non‑compliance proved respondent bears evidential burden to raise reasonable doubt (Fakie); Plascon‑Evans principle in motion proceedings; late payments and financial incapacity as defence; refusal to vary order vs obligation to apply for variation (Rule 43(6)).
|
20 September 2024 |
|
Bail refusal remitted where state’s evidence was deficient and magistrate lacked necessary facts to assess interests of justice.
Criminal procedure — Bail — Section 60 — Duty of State to place substantial facts before court; adequacy of investigating officer’s affidavit; prosecutor’s preparedness to address s 60(6)–(11) factors; weighing interests of justice vs accused’s personal circumstances; remittal where material facts outstanding.
|
20 September 2024 |
|
Substantial compliance with RAF claim form requirements suffices; special plea based on Board Notice non‑compliance dismissed.
Road Accident Fund Act s24 – prescribed claim form – Board Notice 271 of 2022 and RAF1 form – substantial (not strict) compliance required – completeness of claim form – admissibility/necessity of medico‑legal reports and tax invoices – social legislation interpretation.
|
20 September 2024 |
|
A claim for maintenance arising from wrongful conception can accrue before the child’s birth; prescription may bar late claims.
Prescription — s 12(1) Prescription Act: debt due when creditor acquires complete cause of action; once-and-for-all rule applies to claims for maintenance arising from wrongful conception; exception procedure — excipient must show plea is bad on every reasonable interpretation; birth of child is manifestation of loss, not the wrongful act giving rise to the debt.
|
20 September 2024 |
|
The applicant’s broad discovery requests failed Rule 35(3) relevance requirements and were dismissed as a fishing expedition.
Civil procedure – Rule 35(3) discovery – Relevance determined by pleadings; Swissborough test applied – documents must reasonably contain information that may advance applicant’s case or damage adversary’s case. Discovery not to be used for fishing expeditions; onus on requesting party to show specific relevance. Broad, all-encompassing requests for historical documents refused where not linked to pleaded issues.
|
19 September 2024 |
|
Municipality installed a bulk meter without proven consent; court ordered removal and reconnection of individual meters with residential tariffs.
Municipal law – electricity metering; installation of bulk meter without proof of application or occupier consent; s101 Municipal Systems Act (access to premises); s73 Municipal Systems Act (equitable and accessible services); failure to produce municipal records; relief restoring individual metering and residential tariffs.
|
19 September 2024 |
|
An appeal is moot and dismissed where the plaintiff withdraws the action under Rule 27(2), leaving no live dispute.
Civil procedure – appeal from magistrate’s court (Rule 50) – rescission of judgment – Rule 27(2) withdrawal of action – dominus litis – mootness of appeal – appeal lies against order not reasons – distinction between leave to appeal (reasonable prospects test) and an appeal.
|
19 September 2024 |
|
Applicant granted leave to appeal on reasonable prospects concerning alleged unlawful arrest, detention and malicious prosecution.
Leave to appeal – section 17(1) Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013 – reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons required – raised threshold for leave; alleged unlawful arrest and detention; alleged malicious prosecution; availability of trial record – appellate reconsideration of factual matrix.
|
19 September 2024 |
|
Court set aside earlier costs order, refused strike‑out, and granted eviction under PIE with protections and temporary accommodation for three applicants.
PIE — eviction — service and meaningful engagement requirements; condonation and rescission of costs orders for procedural unfairness; strike‑out of affidavits under Rule 6(15); suitability of land, availability of alternative accommodation and consideration of vulnerable occupiers in determining just and equitable eviction relief.
|
19 September 2024 |
|
Applicant lawfully disqualified for failing to comply with a material tender requirement; review dismissed with costs.
Procurement law — tender evaluation — material compliance with tender specifications — omission to indicate sections on front page — disqualification as non‑responsive; administrative review — PAJA; constitutional procurement framework — s 217 and PPPFA; urgency in procurement review.
|
19 September 2024 |