|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2025 |
|
|
Ejectment based on cancellation of an expired lease fails where holdover created an implied periodic tenancy requiring notice.
Lease law — fixed-term lease expired by effluxion of time — holding over creates implied/tacit periodic lease — termination of indeterminate lease requires reasonable notice — reliance on cancellation of expired lease ineffective — motion proceedings and Plascon-Evans — eviction a drastic remedy requiring clear right to possession.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Applicant granted provisional sentence for admitted principal; acceleration clause deemed a conventional penalty; respondents’ duress defence unsuccessful.
Provisional sentence – liquid document – acknowledgment of debt liquid for admitted capital but not for interest if interest base not ascertainable; Conventional Penalties Act – acceleration clause calling up future unrendered performance may constitute conventional penalty; Economic duress – assertion of denial of access to services requires primary facts to establish probable success; Suretyship – co-principal debtor bound by written acknowledgement.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
A late notice of exception filed after the amended Rule 23(1) time limits and after a Notice of Bar is an irregular step.
Civil procedure — Uniform Rule 23(1) (amended 2019) — peremptory two-stage process for exceptions — notice within 10 days and exception within further 10/15 days — late exception after Notice of Bar is irregular — condonation/ upliftment of bar required.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Applicant granted PIE eviction despite respondents’ bona fide family-title challenge requiring trial to determine ownership.
Property law – PIE eviction – bona fide purchaser with registered title – respondents assert historic family ownership and alleged fraud – genuine dispute of title requiring oral evidence/action proceedings – eviction granted but ownership unresolved.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal granted as another court may reasonably reach different conclusions on security perfection and contract interpretation.
Application for leave to appeal — s 17(1)(a)(i) Superior Courts Act — higher threshold for leave post-Act; perfection of security under Special Notarial Bond; locus standi/authority to sue; refusal of postponement; joinder of third party; contractual interpretation and nexus between loan repayment and payments by third party.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Rescission refused for failure to prove improper service, explain default, or establish a bona fide defence.
Civil procedure – Rescission of default judgment – Uniform Rule 31(2)(b): reasonable explanation, bona fide application, bona fide defence with prospects; Rule 42(1)(a): error must appear from record; Common law rescission – sufficient cause; Service – domicilium and rule 4(1)(a)(iv) affixing; National Credit Act s129/s130 compliance; Condonation for delay.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
Applicant’s Rule 11 consolidation granted due to substantial overlap and no demonstrated substantial prejudice; costs awarded to applicant.
Rule 11 – Consolidation of actions; substantial overlap of law and fact required; allocation of payments across interrelated contracts; identical/mirror counterclaims; balance of convenience; absence of substantial prejudice; costs awarded to successful consolidation applicant.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
Consolidation ordered under Rule 11 where two actions share substantial overlap and no substantial prejudice proven.
Civil procedure — Rule 11 consolidation — discretion exercised where actions share substantial overlap of law and fact; balance of convenience favours consolidation. Risk of conflicting judgments and multiplicity of proceedings justify consolidation. Onus on applicant to show convenience and absence of substantial prejudice to respondent. Identical counterclaims and common contractual matrix support consolidation. Costs — unsuccessful opponent ordered to pay costs including counsel on scale C.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
The respondent ordered to pay R7,000 monthly and R25,000 medical contribution; unsupervised contact allowed, matter referred to Family Advocate.
Family law – Rule 43 interim relief – child maintenance requires assessment of reasonable needs and payor’s ability to pay. Family law – interim contribution to birth-related medical costs – ordered in an amount respondent can reasonably afford. Care and contact – governed by child’s best interests; unsupervised contact may be ordered absent cogent reason to deny. Referral to Family Advocate for report to inform longer-term residence and contact arrangements.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
A preservation order was granted after respondents' admissions established a clear right and a late contradictory affidavit was refused.
Civil procedure – Uniform Rule 6(5)(e): leave to file further affidavits is discretionary; material, tactical contradictions in subsequent affidavits may be refused. Interim relief – final interdict: requirements of clear right, injury/apprehension, and absence of alternative remedy; Plascon-Evans approach applies in disputes of fact. Preservation orders/freezing injunctions: justified where there is real risk of dissipation and ordinary damages would be inadequate. Abuse of process/late reversal: opportunistic retractions of earlier admissions undermine credibility and may attract adverse costs.
|
13 November 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to reinstate the credit agreement under s129 NCA; sale in execution upheld and application dismissed with costs.
National Credit Act s129(3) — reinstatement of credit agreement — consumer must pay all overdue amounts, prescribed default charges and enforcement costs; sale in execution — validity where reinstatement not proved; payment arrangements/forbearance do not necessarily compromise or alter underlying credit agreement; relevance of Nkata v FirstRand Bank.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
Appellate court affirms bail refusal: magistrate erred in s60(9) balancing but facts showed substantial flight risk, appeal dismissed.
Bail — Schedule 5 offences — section 60(4)(b) CPA risk of evasion — factors under s 60(6) including strength of State's case — mandatory s 60(9) balancing of societal interests against accused’s right to liberty — bail conditions as factors (not automatic alternatives) — considerations for foreign nationals — counsel ethics in offering personal accommodation.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
Applicants granted interim interdict preventing respondents selling ROM/lumpy/chip containing PGMs pending review to protect applicants’ prima facie PGM rights.
• Mining law – competing mineral rights – overlapping rights to chromitite where PGMs are disseminated in chromite; obligation to act civiliter modo/with Ubuntu.
• Interim interdict – requirements: prima facie right, irreparable harm, balance of convenience, no satisfactory alternative – satisfied to protect PGM rights pending review.
• Beneficiation and metallurgical process – PGMs recoverable only after fine milling/sub‑1mm processing; ROM/lumpy/small lumpy/chip contain PGMs and may not be sold pending review.
• Relief – interlocutory prohibition on exploitation/sale of PGMs pending review; limited carve‑outs for sub‑1mm chrome concentrate and community use of waste rock.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
An interlocutory Rule 6(15) strike-out challenging evidentiary weight or factual correctness is premature and must await the merits hearing.
Companies Act – business rescue — interlocutory strike-out under Uniform Rule 6(15) — prematurity of strike-out applications aimed at weight or factual correctness — strike-out to be determined with merits where appropriate — costs awarded as wasted costs.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
Manager-signed balance certificates and demand letters established mora; sureties are jointly and severally liable, NCA inapplicable to the suretyships.
Civil procedure – motion proceedings – application of Plascon-Evans/Wightman: bare denials do not create real disputes of fact; Contract law – suretyship/guarantee – co-principal debtor status and joint-and-several liability; Evidence/contract terms – manager-signed certificate of balance admissible and sufficient under contractual clause; Mora – letters of demand place debtor and sureties in mora; National Credit Act – s4(2)(c) excludes these suretyship claims from NCA application.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
High Court may not vary or suspend an ongoing Children's Court care order absent appeal; application dismissed with costs.
Family law – Children's Court orders – jurisdictional limits of the High Court to vary or suspend ongoing Children's Court orders without appeal or variation in the Children's Court. Procedural competency – interim relief and investigative reports in High Court cannot supplant Children's Court dispositions. Dependent relief – secondary prayers premised on primary, incompetent relief must fail.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
High Court will not suspend a reasoned Children’s Court order absent appeal or proper Children’s Court remedy; postponement refused.
Children’s Court orders – status as Magistrates’ Court orders under Children’s Act – High Court’s limited role absent appeal; remedy of variation or appeal lies in Children’s Court; postponement not warranted where prospects of success are weak and respondent prejudiced.
|
12 November 2025 |
|
Parties’ conduct and prima facie evidence can preclude absolution despite allegations of unfulfilled suspensive conditions.
Civil procedure – absolution from the instance – test is whether there is evidence upon which a reasonable court might find for the plaintiff (prima facie case). Contract law – interpretation – whether a clause constitutes a suspensive condition/condition precedent or merely a contractual term must be decided from the language and surrounding circumstances. Contractual conduct – parties’ subsequent conduct (disbursement, suretyship, mortgage registration, payments) may indicate the contract was treated as operative and inform interpretation. Onus – plaintiff bears the burden of proving fulfilment of alleged suspensive conditions where relied upon by defendant. Matrimonial/property and consumer issues – s15(4) Matrimonial Property Act and NCA issues may require defendant evidence and cannot be disposed of on plaintiff’s case alone.
|
11 November 2025 |
|
Summary judgment granted against surety: marriage defence, liquidation and other defences rejected; s15(6) MPA and bona fide defence principles applied.
Civil procedure – summary judgment – requirements to disclose bona fide triable defence; suretyship – spousal consent and s15(6) Matrimonial Property Act – ordinary course of business exception; lex domicilii matrimonii – recognition of foreign marriage; insolvency/liquidation – creditor may proceed against surety despite winding-up proceedings; admissibility of new evidence at summary-judgment stage.
|
11 November 2025 |
|
Winding‑up dismissed where the debt was bona fide disputed; s69(1)(a) is a deeming provision, not sole liquidation ground.
Company law – close corporations – section 69(1)(a) Close Corporations Act – deeming provision as to inability to pay debts; not an independent basis for liquidation – must invoke s344(f) Companies Act 1973. Civil practice – Plascon‑Evans standard applies in liquidation applications where respondent’s factual version is disputed. Insolvency/winding‑up – winding‑up not to be used to enforce bona fide disputed debts; persistence amounts to abuse of process. Costs – punitive costs (attorney and client) appropriate where applicant persists despite clear, reasonably grounded dispute.
|
11 November 2025 |
|
Approval in principle does not satisfy a mortgage-bond suspensive condition; sale lapsed and urgent relief was refused.
• Contract law – suspensive condition/condition precedent – finance/mortgage bond condition must be fulfilled in forma specifica within agreed time limit.
• Banking/real-estate practice – 'approval in principle' does not equate to a contractual 'quotation and/or pre-agreement statement' where further conditions (valuation, documents) are required.
• Civil procedure – urgency under Uniform Rule 6(12)(b) and interdictory relief – applicant must show urgency, clear right and absence of satisfactory alternative remedies.
• Joinder – purchaser and lending bank as necessary parties where their legal interests may be affected.
|
11 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal granted to Full Court because the proposed appeal has reasonable prospects of success under s 17(1)(a)(i).
Civil procedure – application for leave to appeal – s 17(1)(a)(i) Superior Courts Act – whether appeal has reasonable prospects of success (heightened threshold). Public procurement – review of tender award – compliance with s 217(1) Constitution (fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost‑effective). Procurement requirements – whether BBBEE verification certificate/affidavit or organogram are mandatory pre‑qualification conditions. Allegations of misrepresentation, tax non‑compliance and collusion in bid submissions – whether such grounds justify setting aside an award. Procedural disposition – leave granted to Full Court, costs to be costs in the appeal.
|
11 November 2025 |
|
A superior court may, under section 173, enroll and postpone procedural matters despite Uniform Rules, where interests of justice permit.
Constitutional and civil procedure – inherent power of Superior Courts (section 173) – courts may regulate their own processes and depart from strict observance of Uniform Rules where interests of justice require; rules exist for courts, not courts for rules. Procedure – enrollment and postponement of matters on motion roll – Registrar not shown to have exclusive enrollment power under rule 6. Limits – inherent power confined to procedural matters and subject to prejudice/interests of justice assessment. Costs – interlocutory costs reserved for determination by the hearing court.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
Court confirmed sequestration, refused extension, finding the guarantee a primary obligation and a reasonable prospect of benefit to creditors.
Insolvency — sequestration — extension of provisional sequestration order — test for postponement/extension (prima facie defence and reasonable explanation) — demand guarantee vs suretyship — primary/demand undertaking enforceable despite challenge to underlying debtor’s agreement — waiver of excussion — insurance payments speculative/res inter alios acta — benefit to creditors: reasonable prospect of uncovering concealed assets (nulla bona returns).
|
10 November 2025 |
|
A written offer to compromise (s8(e)), even if 'without prejudice', can found final sequestration; postponement refused.
Insolvency law – Act of insolvency – s8(e) offer/arrangement with creditors – settlement letters (including without prejudice) can constitute an act of insolvency. Practice – Replying/supplementary affidavits – later acts of insolvency material may be relied upon where before the court. Civil procedure – tactical late filing and avoidance of dealing with material – postponement refused. Sequestration – advantage to creditors and final sequestration order granted where act of insolvency established.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
WhatsApp messages and banking entries proved that payments in a romantic context were loans, not donations.
Contract — loan v donation — oral loans during a romantic relationship — role of contemporaneous electronic communications and bank references in proving intention. Evidence — weight of documentary evidence vis-à-vis witness demeanour; adverse inference from silence where repudiation expected (McWilliams principle). Civil procedure — absolution from the instance set aside where plaintiffs discharge onus on probabilities.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
A municipality may lawfully classify privately provided education properties as 'business and commercial' under the Rates Act; this is not an income tax and is not irrational.
• Municipal rates – Differential rates under s 8 of the Municipal Property Rates Act – Permissible basis: use, permitted use or both – 'Business and commercial' category valid under s 8(2)(c). • Taxation – Municipal rates distinguishable from income tax; classification not an impermissible tax on income. • Sub‑categories – s 8(4) ministerial authorisation required only for actual sub‑categorisation; by‑law definitions giving content to existing category lawful. • SPLUMA – Land‑use definitions not determinative for rates classification; different statutory contexts.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
Final winding-up granted where deadlock and diversion of business by co-member established; 50% beneficial membership upheld.
Company law – winding-up on just and equitable grounds – deadlock between equal members and diversion of business to related entity warrant winding-up despite absence of proven commercial insolvency. Shareholding dispute – nominee versus beneficial ownership – beneficial interest found on balance of probabilities. Equitable defences – alleged lack of clean hands does not bar relief where conduct did not cause breakdown. Procedure – provisional order may be made on prima facie case; respondents must adduce evidence on return day to rebut. Insolvency inquiries – section 417/418 enquiry requires proper application procedure and proposed commissioner.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
Application for anti‑spoliatory relief dismissed for lack of statutory notice and absence of prior possession; punitive costs awarded.
Customs and Excise Act s96(1) – jurisdictional notice requirement; mandament van spolie – requirement of prior peaceful possession; urgency practice – abuse of urgent process; Uniform Rule 7 – authority to represent; costs de bonis propriis and attorney-and-client scale.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
Transgender inmate entitled to state-funded gender-affirming hormone therapy and protection from discrimination under PEPUDA and the Constitution.
• Equality law – PEPUDA – unfair discrimination and harassment – denial of gender expression, misgendering, inappropriate housing and withholding of gender-affirming treatment.
• Constitutional rights of detainees – section 35(2)(e) – ‘adequate medical treatment’ includes medically indicated gender-affirming hormone therapy and associated care.
• Correctional Services Act/National Health Act – tiered health-care argument rejected where statutory limitation unproclaimed and does not exclude specialist care for inmates.
• Remedies – enforcement of SOPs, accommodation in single cell or with same gender-identity inmates, state-funded gender-affirming health care throughout detention and parole.
|
10 November 2025 |
|
Amendment to plead a contractual cause of action did not create a new 'debt' for prescription; exception to prescription upheld.
Prescription – Prescription Act s10 and s11 – debt versus cause of action – amendment introducing contractual cause of action did not create new debt where original particulars already raised contract – special plea of prescription dismissed by exception.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Arrest and detention were lawful where injured complainant identified suspects; no mala fide non‑disclosure by the respondent.
Delict – unlawful arrest and detention; Criminal Procedure Act s40(1)(b) – reasonable suspicion; vicarious liability and course of employment; post‑appearance detention and duty to disclose material facts to prosecutor; evaluation of credibility and probabilities.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Whether the plaintiffs’ arrest and detention were unlawful; court found the respondent not liable and dismissed the claim.
Delict — unlawful arrest and detention; s40(1)(b) Criminal Procedure Act — reasonable suspicion and jurisdictional facts for warrantless arrest; vicarious liability of Minister of Police; post‑appearance remand for verification of legality/address; duty to disclose relevant facts to prosecutor; burden and evaluation of single-witness evidence.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Application for leave to appeal dismissed: no reasonable prospects, mero motu review impermissible, Biowatch principle inapplicable.
Civil procedure — leave to appeal — s 17(1)(a) Superior Courts Act — reasonable prospects of success; Administrative law — collateral challenge and mero motu review — administrative acts remain valid until set aside; PAJA — condonation requirement and jurisdictional fact; Costs — Biowatch principle limited to constitutional litigation; judicial discretion in costs.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Contractual cancellation for non-payment upheld; bare denial without proof fails — eviction ordered and attorney-and-client costs awarded.
Commercial lease — cancellation for non-payment under contractual breach clause; motion proceedings — bare denial insufficient to raise bona fide dispute of fact (Wightman); onus on debtor to prove payment; lawful eviction ordered; contractual attorney-and-client costs upheld.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Court refused condonation and ordered discovery of financials, tax returns, SASRIA claims and CCTV for damages assessment.
Civil procedure – Rule 35(3) discovery – Whether respondent must discover financial statements, tax returns, insurance claims and CCTV – Court may go behind discovery affidavit where pleadings/documents give reasonable grounds to suppose documents are in possession – Condonation for late affidavit refused – Costs on scale B.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal dismissed: refusal of postponement had no factual foundation and no reasonable prospect of success.
Superior Courts Act s17 – leave to appeal – appeal requires reasonable prospect of success or compelling reason; Postponement applications – need factual foundation and proof of prejudice to justify postponement; Fair hearing (s34) – allegation of ineffective representation must be substantiated; Supporting affidavits/new evidence – leave to appeal confined to the record of the court a quo; Costs – attorney and client costs where applicant failed to ensure timely prosecution of application.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
Court awards substantial general damages and trust for a conscious, profoundly disabled minor, distinguishing SCA precedent.
Delict — Birth-related severe brain injury — General damages for conscious, profoundly disabled minor — Distinction from SCA AAS decision — Joint expert minute binding — Necessity of trust; 7.5% costs — Refusal to develop common law for periodic payments absent factual foundation (DZ).
|
7 November 2025 |
|
A suspended prison sentence qualifies for statutory director disqualification and mandates a delinquency declaration under the Companies Act.
Companies Act s69(8)(b)(iv) – director disqualification – suspended prison sentence qualifies as "imprisoned without option of fine"; Companies Act s162(5)(a) – mandatory declaration of delinquent director where person acted while disqualified; statutory interpretation – focus on sentence imposed, not sentence served.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
Appeal upheld: magistrate erred; final protection order required under DV Act for respondent’s abuse of complainant and children.
Domestic Violence Act s6(4) — mandatory final protection order where balance of probabilities established; parental alienation and child exposure as emotional/psychological abuse; third‑party actor liability; distinction between DV Act and Prevention of Harassment Act definitions of harassment; approach to disputes of fact on affidavit in motion proceedings.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
Court issued interim order directing utility to restore electricity and condoned defective service due to urgency.
Urgent interim relief – condonation of non‑compliance with rules of notice and service – rule nisi – interim interdict directing utility to restore electricity – state directed to ensure compliance.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
Police officer convicted of murder and attempted murder; circumstantial and child testimony established guilt, premeditation not proven.
Criminal law – Murder and attempted murder – credibility and competency of child witness – circumstantial and ballistic evidence – no forced entry – accused’s inconsistent versions – planning/premeditation not proven – convictions under s51(2) of Act 105 of 1997.
|
6 November 2025 |
|
Final winding-up granted where respondent admitted debt and insolvency; condonation for late opposition refused.
Company law – Liquidation – Final winding-up order – Where respondent does not dispute indebtedness or insolvency, final winding-up appropriate. Civil procedure – Condonation – Late notice to oppose – Reliance on commercial negotiations, impecuniosity and health not sufficient to grant condonation. Service – Compliance with service requirements for rule nisi supports conversion to final order. Practice – Director appearing in person may be heard but cannot create dispute where none exists in papers.
|
5 November 2025 |
|
A writ issued without the creditor complying with section 3(4) of the State Liability Act is unlawful and set aside.
State Liability Act s 3 – requirements for satisfaction of monetary judgments against the State; service on executive authority, accounting officer, State Attorney and treasury. Interpretation – 'may' in s 3(4) is permissive as to election to proceed but mandatory as a precondition if creditor elects to execute. Execution – writ issued without compliance with s 3(4) unlawful; attachments set aside. Joinder – non-joinder of registrar not fatal to setting aside writ.
|
5 November 2025 |
|
A judgment creditor must comply with section 3(4) of the State Liability Act before obtaining a writ against State property; failure renders the writ invalid.
State Liability Act s3 — execution against State property; whether service required by s3(4) is jurisdictional before issuing writ under s3(6); purpose of s3 to make attachment a last resort; State Attorney duties s3(2) do not relieve judgment creditor of s3(4) obligations; non-joinder of registrar not fatal.
|
5 November 2025 |
|
Declarator against the former occupier and eviction of persons occupying through him granted; occupiers given 30 days to vacate.
Eviction (PIE) – declaratory relief where former occupant has vacated; eviction against persons occupying “through or under” a former occupier; service and notice under section 4(2) PIE; audi alteram partem and procedural fairness; just and equitable assessment of eviction (consideration of City report, homelessness risk, alternative accommodation); sheriff authorised to evict; costs against former occupier.
|
5 November 2025 |
|
Cancellation of the sale agreement terminated the second applicant’s contractual shareholder rights; the director’s removal was valid.
Company law; sale of shares agreement – cancellation and restitution – contractual entitlement to be treated as shareholder does not survive cancellation; procedural urgency; costs including two counsel.
|
4 November 2025 |
|
Improved or self-created circumstances do not justify urgent relief; application struck for lack of urgency.
Urgency — self-created urgency; Rule 6(12) — requirements for urgent relief; abuse of court process; interim deadlines and extensions; costs on attorney-and-client scale.
|
4 November 2025 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove PRASA’s or contracted guards’ negligence; claim dismissed and costs awarded to defendant.
Delict — public carrier/organ of state duty to protect commuters — delegation to private security contractors — Langley Fox test for employer liability for independent contractors — foreseeability, reasonable steps and supervisory measures — reliance on contemporaneous liability report over inconsistent plaintiff testimony — failure to prove negligence and causation.
|
4 November 2025 |
|
Application to convert a five-year imprisonment to correctional supervision dismissed due to offence gravity, unreliable amicus evidence, and abuse of process.
Criminal Procedure Act s276A(3) — conversion of imprisonment to correctional supervision; Correctional Services Act s73; organised crime offences with prescribed minimum sentences (POCA); role and reliability of amicus curiae submissions; abuse of process and public confidence in sentencing.
|
4 November 2025 |