|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2021 |
|
|
Agent’s commission claim dismissed: sale agreement validity and contractual notice requirement not established.
* Contract law – validity of sale of land – requirement that parties/principal be identifiable ex facie agreement (Alienation of Land Act s2(1)).
* Agency/mandate – estate agent’s entitlement to commission – interplay between clause granting rights on cancellation and requirement of seller’s written notice to purchaser.
* Misrepresentation/non-disclosure – alleged failure to disclose NHBRC registration – requirement that seller possessed requisite knowledge to ground actionable silence.
* Civil procedure – admission of supplementary affidavits (Rule 6/Rule 30 issues) and assessment of onus in motion proceedings where final relief sought (Plascon‑Evans application).
|
30 November 2021 |
|
Condonation granted; court held minimum‑sentence procedure was not unfair and dismissed the appellant's sentence appeal.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act (s 51(2)) – omission in charge sheet or record does not automatically render sentence unfair – fact‑based enquiry; condonation for late filing – sentencing discretion; attempted murder and firearm possession – aggravating features and deterrence.
|
30 November 2021 |
|
Actuarial and expert evidence upheld; substantial loss-of-earnings award and s17(4)(a) undertaking granted.
* Road Accident Fund – quantum – assessment of future loss of earnings – acceptance of multidisciplinary expert evidence and actuarial methodology including contingency deductions.
* Road Accident Fund Act s17(4)(a) – undertaking for future medical/hospital treatment – order to reimburse 100% of qualifying costs on proof.
* Procedural – failure to elect on RAF4 and dilatory conduct leading to strike-out of defence and default quantum hearing.
* Costs – inclusion of expert preparation/qualifying fees, travel and accommodation, and counsel.
|
30 November 2021 |
|
Applicant awarded loss of support and funeral expenses after breadwinner’s death; actuarial apportionment and expert evidence accepted.
Road Accident Fund – claim for loss of support and funeral expenses – dependency of spouse and children – expert actuarial and industrial-psychology evidence accepted – actuarial apportionment (2:2:1:1) and Basis IB (age 21) applied – default judgment following strike-out – costs and interest ordered.
|
30 November 2021 |
|
|
30 November 2021 |
|
|
30 November 2021 |
|
|
29 November 2021 |
|
Liquidators’ late affidavit admitted; matter referred to trial; applicant ordered to pay interveners' and post-affidavit liquidators' costs.
Civil procedure – urgent application for possession of movable assets – intervention by secured creditors holding special notarial bond; Companies law – liquidators’ condonation for late affidavit relying on s417 insolvency inquiry – admission of further affidavit permitted; Evidence – statements made in s417 inquiry not hearsay where relied on to show existence of triable disputes; Referral to trial where material factual disputes require discovery, oral evidence and cross-examination; Costs – intervenors’ costs and liquidators’ post-affidavit costs awarded against applicant; procedural conversion of application papers to simple summons for trial.
|
29 November 2021 |
|
|
29 November 2021 |
|
|
26 November 2021 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where estate administration and Rule 46A defences were not raised or evidenced in eviction papers.
Leave to appeal – section 17(1) Superior Courts Act – prospects of success and compelling reasons; Administration of Estates Act s30 – requirement to plead and place evidence; Uniform Rules r46A – relevance to challenges to sale in execution and rescission proceedings; eviction proceedings against bona fide purchaser.
|
26 November 2021 |
|
Receiver may recover spouse’s 50% pension share where no final division order issued and no valid compromise existed.
Family law – division of joint estate – pension interest as asset at date of divorce – living annuity distinction (Montanari) – receiver and liquidator’s powers to realise assets and demand delivery – functus officio – ex parte disclosure obligations – punitive costs (attorney and client).
|
26 November 2021 |
|
|
26 November 2021 |
|
|
26 November 2021 |
|
Leave under Rule 24(2) required before serving reconvention against plaintiff and a non‑party; court granted conditional leave.
Rule 24(2) – Claims in reconvention – leave required before serving plea and reconvention against plaintiff and a third person; defendant must disclose locus standi and causes of action but need not prove prima facie success; joinder/Rule 10 principles and considerations of justice, equity and convenience govern grant of leave; exceptions for vagueness attack form not legal validity.
|
26 November 2021 |
|
|
25 November 2021 |
|
|
25 November 2021 |
CL|Administrative Review|Administrative Action|Improper Conduct|Collusion |
25 November 2021 |
|
|
25 November 2021 |
|
|
25 November 2021 |
|
Applicants failed to prove contempt; CSOS Ombud is primary forum for body corporate governance disputes; application dismissed with costs.
Sectional titles – administrator convening AGM – appointment of executive managing agent versus election of trustees – validity of special resolution (75% threshold) – jurisdiction: CSOS Act gives Ombud primary jurisdiction under s39; High Court supervisory/appellate only – contempt: civil contempt requires proof of intentional non‑compliance on balance of probabilities.
|
24 November 2021 |
|
Precautionary suspension by a political party is not ripe for common-law review and interim relief is premature.
Voluntary associations — common-law review of internal disciplinary decisions; precautionary suspension vs punitive suspension; audi alteram partem in party disciplinary context; requirement of contractual/constitutional breach or fundamental unfairness for judicial intervention; premature relief and locus for interdicts; allegations of bias and Plascon-Evans approach.
|
23 November 2021 |
|
Failure to file a power of attorney with a notice of appeal does not automatically lapse the appeal; eviction stayed pending appeal.
Eviction — appeal prosecution — effect of failure to file power of attorney with notice of appeal; Rule 7(2) Uniform Rules — peremptory requirement for set down but not causing lapse of appeal — confirmation of rule nisi and stay of eviction pending appeal.
|
23 November 2021 |
|
Effective 10-year sentence for drug couriering upheld; sentencing discretion properly exercised given the large quantity of drugs.
* Criminal law – Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act s5(b) and s17(e) – couriering of large quantity of cocaine; sentencing consequences.
* Appeal against sentence – appellate restraint – interference only where trial court misdirected or sentence is disturbingly inappropriate (Rabie; Anderson; Moswathupa).
* Sentencing principle – quantity as barometer of moral blameworthiness – personal circumstances (pregnancy, inducement) may mitigate but do not necessarily outweigh quantity and societal interests.
|
23 November 2021 |
|
Leave to appeal refused for non-compliance with Rule 49 and lack of reasonable prospects of success.
Leave to appeal — Uniform Rule 49(1) — requirement to furnish succinct grounds within prescribed time; failure to amend and absence of condonation fatal. Superior Courts Act s17 — higher threshold for reasonable prospects of success for leave. Registrar of Deeds — registration as derivative act; transfer by operation of law (intestate succession). Alienation of Land Act — formalities; defective agreements cannot found valid title.
|
23 November 2021 |
|
Rescission refused where applicant failed to explain default, had poor prospects on merits, and delayed bringing relief.
Civil procedure — rescission of default judgment — rule 42 and common law rescission — holistic exercise of discretion — requirements of reasonable explanation for default and bona fide defence — assessment of prospects on merits — delay and prejudice — non‑compliance with discovery/order — costs (no punitive costs absent proven dishonesty).
|
23 November 2021 |
|
A court applying s 54(1)(a)(v) has broader discretion to remove an executor than the common-law Sackville West test.
* Administration of Estates Act s 54(1)(a)(v) – removal of executor – statutory discretion broader than common-law Sackville West test; * Common law v statute – Sackville West principle distinguished from s 54(1)(a)(v); * Review v removal – documentary irregularities do not necessarily limit relief to review where substantive rule-of-law concerns arise; * Fettering of discretion – directory orders to Master do not unlawfully fetter discretion; * Leave to appeal – requirement of reasonable prospects of success and absence of compelling reasons.
|
22 November 2021 |
|
Respondents held in contempt for failing to issue a proper rates clearance certificate; mandamus ordered and suspended fine imposed.
* Civil contempt – failure to comply with court order to issue rates clearance certificate – willful and mala fide non‑compliance established.
* Urgency – continuous contempt and risk of commercial prejudice justified urgent hearing; non‑compliance with practice directives condoned.
* Superior Courts Act s18 – late application for leave to appeal (without condonation) and rescission proceedings do not suspend operation of order.
* Remedy – mandamus to compel issuance of proper clearance certificate; suspended fine and costs as deterrent and effective relief.
* Obligations of state organs – state must obey court orders; cannot ignore orders pending appeal or rescission.
|
22 November 2021 |
|
|
22 November 2021 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: no reasonable prospects nor compelling reasons to disturb subpoena and confidentiality findings.
Application for leave to appeal — Superior Courts Act s 17(1)(a)(i) and (ii) — subpoena duces tecum for medical records — declaratory relief re privilege/confidentiality — requirement for factual foundation — reliance on conflicting precedent (Lott) insufficient to establish compelling reasons — costs follow result (including two counsel).
|
21 November 2021 |
|
An urgent interdict was struck off because the applicant’s delay created self-induced urgency, attracting punitive attorney-and-client costs.
Urgent application — relief to interdict auction of disputed property — delay and self-created urgency — abuse of urgent procedure — special/punitive costs order (attorney-and-client including counsel) — application struck off.
|
21 November 2021 |
|
|
19 November 2021 |
|
|
19 November 2021 |
|
|
19 November 2021 |
|
Where two mutually destructive versions exist, an accused’s reasonably possibly true account precludes conviction if reasonable doubt remains.
Criminal law – conflicting versions – mutually destructive accounts – accused’s version to be accepted if reasonably possibly true (S v Shakell); onus of proof – state must exclude reasonable doubt; assessment of probabilities and credibility where road‑rage incident involves sudden, emotionally charged events.
|
19 November 2021 |
|
Rescission refused: affixed service at chosen domicilium valid; judgment not erroneously granted; punitive costs awarded.
Civil procedure – Rescission of default judgment – Rule 42(1)(a): judgment erroneously granted requires procedural/error on record; service at chosen domicilium by affixing to unit door valid under Rule 4(1)(a)(iv) where sheriff's return stands unchallenged; non-compliance with Rule 6 condoned under Rule 27(3); Rule 7(1) challenge to deponent’s authority must be timely; costs on attorney-and-client scale justified where rescue application vexatious.
|
18 November 2021 |
|
Particulars failing to allege cause of action against non-selling builder were excipiable and set aside with leave to amend.
Exception — failure to disclose cause of action; Interpretation of sale agreement — seller and warranty obligations confined to named seller; Integration/entire agreement clause — limits tacit or implied terms; Pleadings — incompatibility between pleading and written agreement renders parts excipiable; Actio redhibitoria — cannot be raised for first time in heads of argument; Amendment — leave to cure defective particulars; Correct party citation and costs awarded to excipient.
|
18 November 2021 |
|
Applicant’s motion to set aside separation agreement for alleged misrepresentation dismissed; referral to trial refused; costs awarded to respondents.
* Civil procedure – Uniform Rules r 6(5)(g) – referral to trial or oral evidence – requirements: genuine dispute of fact and whether applicant ought to have anticipated disputes. * Contract – separation agreement – allegation of misrepresentation/fraud inducing signature – requirement that claimant would not have contracted but for true facts. * Motion proceedings – Plascon-Evans approach to disputes of fact on affidavit. * Costs – discretion to award punitive costs; courts may decline where applicant personally appears and respondents do not press for punitive scale.
|
18 November 2021 |
|
|
17 November 2021 |
|
Applicant failed to meet section 18 requirements; execution pending appeal denied because respondents may suffer irreparable harm.
* Civil procedure — Superior Courts Act s 18 — Execution of a decision pending application for leave to appeal — Exceptional circumstances required. * Section 18(3) — Applicant must prove on balance of probabilities irreparable harm to itself and that respondents will not suffer irreparable harm. * Court’s discretion — only available if statutory preconditions met and must consider prospects of success. * Irretrievability of funds/distribution to wrong persons can constitute irreparable harm to respondents.
|
17 November 2021 |
|
Sequestration granted where debtor likely used successor company as alter ego to evade creditors; trustee may recover assets.
Insolvency Act s12(1) – sequestration – applicant must show on balance of probabilities "reason to believe" sequestration advantageous to creditors and reasonable grounds that a trustee may recover assets; alter-ego and possible fraudulent transfer to a successor company relevant; costs to be costs in sequestration.
|
16 November 2021 |
|
|
16 November 2021 |
|
Particulars must plead material facts and damages with sufficient particularity; vague claims are excipiable and must be amended.
Exception — pleadings — requirement to plead material facts (facta probanda) with sufficient particularity under Uniform Rule 18; vague and embarrassing pleadings excipiable. Contract — verbal insurance agreement — must plead date, place, material terms, insured items, promised values, and compliance. Breach — must plead particulars of repudiation or breach. Unjustified enrichment — claim must be supported by factual basis; speculative large-figure enrichment claim excipiable. Damages — quantum and basis must be pleaded. Rule 23/strike-out — averments alleged scandalous/vexatious require a proper strike-out application. Rule 33(1) notice — not applicable where it does not comply with form and is irrelevant to exception proceedings. Costs — self-represented litigant, court exercised discretion: each party to pay own costs.
|
16 November 2021 |
|
Court upheld 12-year sentence for appellant’s cocaine importation, finding sentencing proper and crediting pre-trial custody.
Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act s5(b)/s17 – importing cocaine (406.9g); CLAA s51(2) minimum sentences – inapplicable to District Court where value not proved; sentencing discretion – appellate interference only for material misdirection or startling disparity; credit for pre-trial detention.
|
16 November 2021 |
|
A lender's acceleration claim failed: emails evidenced agreed COVID-19 reduced payments and the second suit constituted abuse of process.
* Civil procedure – lis pendens – same parties and same cause of action – discretion to hear matter despite overlapping proceedings.
* Contract variation – temporary reduction of loan instalments – binding variation by email communications under the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act.
* COVID-19 – negotiated relief during national lockdown – proportionate payment linked to rental collections.
* Abuse of court process – launching related proceedings while an earlier related matter pending may constitute abuse.
* Motion proceedings – disputed facts (Plascon-Evans) – when referral to oral evidence is unnecessary.
|
16 November 2021 |
|
Court granted sole guardianship and leave to relocate child to New Zealand, finding relocation bona fide and in the child’s best interests.
Children — Relocation — Termination of specific guardianship rights (ss 18(3)(c)(iii) and (iv)) and grant of sole guardianship to allow relocation — Urgency established — Expert report not required where sufficient factual matrix and prior forensic assessment exist — Best interests paramount — Appointment of parenting coordinator and interim contact regime — Costs awarded against opposing parent.
|
15 November 2021 |
|
Applicant detained for entering with fraudulent visa; detention lawful and court will not interfere with pending criminal prosecution.
Immigration law – arrest and detention for presenting fraudulent travel/visa documents; Refugees Act – entitlement to apply for asylum at port of entry; Criminal procedure – court must not interfere with pending prosecution by ordering release absent illegality of detention; Credibility and full disclosure material to refugee relief applications.
|
15 November 2021 |
|
Court enforces interim child contact order, forbids unilateral withholding of contact, and orders urgent voice-of-child assessment.
Family law – enforcement of interim parenting/contact orders – urgency and condonation of non-compliance – unilateral withholding of contact unjustified absent evidence of harm – permission to retrieve household items pending divorce – directive for voice of the child assessment.
|
15 November 2021 |
|
A valid suretyship and admitted inability to pay do not justify final sequestration absent proof sequestration will advantage creditors.
Insolvency — sequestration — valid suretyship gives liquidated claim; act of insolvency may arise from written acknowledgement of inability to pay; disposition of assets requires proof of prejudice to creditors; applicant must prove sequestration would advantage creditors (including dividend calculation per practice manual) — provisional order discharged where advantage not shown.
|
15 November 2021 |
|
Court enforces subpoena against company despite service on director, protects confidentiality and declines criminal sanctions in motion proceedings.
Subpoena duces tecum – enforcement – substantial compliance with service on company where served on sole director at registered office – relevance of documents sought assessed against pleadings – confidentiality not a bar but protected by court order – overbreadth cured by adjusting start date – criminal sanctions for non‑compliance require criminal process, not opposed motion proceedings.
|
15 November 2021 |