|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2026 |
|
|
Leave to appeal dismissed where respondents abandoned opposition and failed to show reasonable prospects or compelling reasons.
Leave to appeal – test of reasonable prospects or compelling reasons – abandonment of opposition – refusal of postponement – sealed evidence not permitted – virtual hearing and litigant conduct – costs on scale C including senior and junior counsel.
|
3 February 2026 |
|
Late-raised volenti defence not permitted on appeal; unpleaded factual case cannot ground liability; condonation narrowly granted.
Delict — boarding trains — whether train was stationary or moving; Pleadings — cannot found liability on unpleaded factual case; Evidence — documents in bundle require proper proof despite contradictory pre-trial minutes; Defence — volenti non fit iniuria raised late cannot be advanced on appeal; Procedure — condonation for late notice of appeal and reinstatement.
|
3 February 2026 |
|
Restitution after cancellation requires compensation equal to fair repair costs assessed by reference to the pre-occupation condition and valued at cancellation date.
Contract law – cancellation and restitutio in integrum – restitution quantified as fair and reasonable cost to restore destroyed improvements; valuation as at cancellation date; restoration assessed by reference to actual pre-occupation condition not new construction costs; VAT recoverable; no interest on proceeds of sold asset once paid.
|
3 February 2026 |
|
The applicant’s appeal succeeded: writ declared moot, trust funds released, respondent ordered to pay admitted arrears.
Family law – maintenance arrears – writ of execution issued by Registrar against retirement annuity – writ rendered moot where specified funds exhausted – trust funds in attorneys’ account payable to applicant – admitted arrears ordered paid with prescribed interest – remaining disputes of fact referred to trial – reinstatement and condonation of appeal.
|
3 February 2026 |
|
A demand addressed to a director, not the corporate lessee, was ineffective; sub-letting a lessee-owned hangar did not amount to repudiation.
Lease law – demand and mora – requirement that written demand identify contracting party, obligation, time to perform and consequences; privity and juristic persons – director cannot be treated as contracting lessee; distinction between ‘premises’ (ground footprint) and lessee-owned structure (hangar); repudiation – objective test requiring unequivocal intention not to be bound.
|
2 February 2026 |
|
Applicant's Rule 43 claim for interim maintenance and costs dismissed for material non-disclosure; Family Advocate referral ordered for children's residence.
Family law – Rule 43 interim maintenance – strict duty of full disclosure – material non-disclosure grounds for refusal of relief – contribution to legal costs requires need, particulars and respondent’s ability to pay – referral to Family Advocate for investigation and recommendations regarding contact and residence; status quo maintained.
|
2 February 2026 |
|
Summary judgment granted where respondents’ locus, illegibility and repossession defences failed to raise bona fide triable issues.
Summary judgment – Uniform Rule 32 – bona fide defence requirement – locus standi and cession – illegibility of annexed contract – bare denials of breach, guarantee and certificate of balance – repossession not repudiation where claim had accrued – deponent authority challenge without Rule 7 invalid – costs on attorney-and-client scale.
|
2 February 2026 |
|
Court upheld refund for payment for undelivered goods; unpleaded non-delivery claim permissible where fully ventilated and no prejudice.
Pleadings and proof – court may decide unpleaded issue if fully ventilated and no prejudice; non-delivery and restitution for undelivered goods; validity and notice of standard terms and conditions; absolution from the instance; appellate deference to trial credibility findings.
|
2 February 2026 |
| January 2026 |
|
|
Whether the appellant met the burden to show the interests of justice warranted bail in a Schedule 5 motor-vehicle-theft charge.
Bail — Schedule 5 offence — onus on accused under s60(11)(b) — admissibility of further evidence on appeal — prior convictions, parole status and pending similar charges considered — inquisitorial nature of bail proceedings — factors under ss60(4)–(8).
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Conveyancer appointed by purchaser acted as purchaser’s agent; conveyancer’s failure to pay proceeds entitled seller to cancel and reverse transfer.
Sale of immovable property — purchaser-appointed conveyancer — agency and receipt of purchase price — payment into attorney’s business account v trust account — material breach — cancellation of agreement — reversal of transfer — misjoinder of director.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Late, unsupported review of an LPC investigation dismissed for undue delay and absence of evidence of bias.
Administrative law – judicial review – delay and condonation – undue and unexplained delay bars review; Administrative law – rationality standard – decision rationally connected to evidence; Professional conduct – complaint about attorneys’ opinion and conduct; Intellectual property – idea/expression dichotomy in copyright; Costs – party-and-party scale ordered.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Insured driver 70% negligent, plaintiff 30% contributorily negligent; RAF to provide section 17(4) undertaking and loss of earnings awarded.
Road Accident Fund — motor collision — negligence and contributory negligence — apportionment of liability 70%/30% — Section 17(4) RAF undertaking for future medical expenses — loss of earnings calculation — insufficient proof of past earnings and appropriate contingencies applied.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where alleged attorney errors did not create reasonable prospects of success or vitiate the PIE-based eviction order.
Civil procedure — Leave to appeal — s17(1) Superior Courts Act — stringent threshold; Motion procedure — litigants bound by conduct of legal representatives; Eviction law — PIE and s26 enquiry; Evidence — confirmatory affidavits and inadmissibility of new evidence at leave stage.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Urgent application removed for failure to prove service; applicant ordered to pay costs.
Civil procedure – Urgent applications – Proof of service – Failure to produce evidence of service when given opportunity justifies removal from urgent roll; costs awarded against applicant.
|
29 January 2026 |
|
Urgent application dismissed: not urgent, improper papers, wrong forum for Magistrates’ Court taxation review; punitive costs awarded.
Practice and procedure — urgency — review of Magistrates’ Court taxation — proper forum is Magistrates’ Court (Rule 35, s81) — Rule 6(6) does not permit unlimited supplementation — request for determination without hearing refused — vexatious litigant threshold under Vexatious Proceedings Act s2 — costs (attorney and client).
|
29 January 2026 |
|
Cancellation for arrears upheld despite e‑mail notice; deregistration raised irregularly; eviction granted with costs.
Lease law – cancellation for breach (arrears) – requirement of notice – contractual prohibition on e‑mail for formal notices – interpretation with reference to parties’ subsequent conduct – Companies Act s82 deregistration and effect on proceedings – eviction granted.
|
27 January 2026 |
|
An insurer’s subrogation does not permit it to depose to a party’s Rule 35 discovery affidavit unless joined as a party.
Civil procedure – discovery – Rule 35 – discovery affidavit must be deposed to by a party of record – insurer’s subrogation does not confer procedural party status unless formally joined – non‑party insurer’s affidavit non‑compliant and set aside; condonation for late affidavit granted under Melane test.
|
26 January 2026 |
|
A divorce in community of property cannot be separated from division of the joint estate; separation would cause prejudice and practical problems.
Family law – marriage in community of property – conceptual inseparability of divorce and division of joint estate – separation of issues inappropriate – maintenance and asset disclosure risks.
|
26 January 2026 |
|
Commissioner may order third‑party documents only if directly relevant; overbroad orders are irrational and set aside.
Companies Act s417/418 inquiries — scope of commissioner’s power to compel documents from third parties — relevance test: documents must ‘concern’ the insolvent company’s trade, dealings, affairs or property — overbroad/vague production orders irrational and reviewable — sale subject to unfulfilled suspensive condition void ab initio; liquidator entitled to vindicate asset.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
Applicant failed to prove respondent was the debtor; provisional liquidation discharged and costs awarded to respondent.
Companies Act — provisional liquidation — creditor’s onus to prove company is debtor; Plascon-Evans test; weight of informal communications (WhatsApp) as evidence; identification/substitution of debtor; costs following event.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal dismissed: Rule 38(2) expert affidavits do not bind court; causation for loss of earnings not proven.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal under s17(1)(a)(i) Superior Courts Act – Rule 38(2) expert affidavits admissible but not binding – actuarial evidence as advisory re contingencies and calculations – causation and 'but for' test for future loss of earnings – costs for RAF Default Court appearances.
|
22 January 2026 |
|
Winding‑up application postponed due to disputed compliance with Companies Act s346A; court directed specific employee service steps.
Companies Act s346A(1)(b) — service of winding‑up application on employees — methods in descending order (internal notice board; front gate; front door) — compliance required prior to granting winding‑up order; Inherent powers s173 — courts may direct alternative or specific service to give effect to s346A; Disputed service and credibility of affidavits may justify postponement rather than immediate provisional relief; Interaction of Close Corporations Act s69 (deeming provision) with Companies Act s344(f) jurisdiction.
|
21 January 2026 |
|
Applicant entitled to compel production of property-line relocation documents under Rule 35(12) as relevant to possible relief.
Civil procedure — Rule 35(12) — discovery/compellable documents — relevance of post-decision developments to relief — property-line relocation application — costs on Scale A.
|
21 January 2026 |
|
Whether an ex‑dividend share sale required the respondent to pay a later special dividend declared two years after transfer.
Contract interpretation – sale of shares ex-dividend – commercial/contextual (Endumeni) approach to meaning of 'ex dividend' – contemporaneous emails and WhatsApp as primary evidence – admissibility but limited weight of hearsay under the Hearsay Act where principal deceased – onus includes proving negative averment.
|
21 January 2026 |
|
Bare denials to unjustified enrichment claims are insufficient; court compels limited particulars about payments and consideration.
Civil procedure — Pleadings and particulars — Bare denial to unjustified enrichment claim insufficient — Court may compel further particulars identifying admitted payments and whether payments were for value under contract.
|
21 January 2026 |
|
Single eyewitness identification and corroboration upheld murder and attempted murder convictions; possession charges acquitted for insufficient forensic and particular evidence.
Criminal law – identification evidence – single eyewitness identification assessed against visibility, proximity and prior acquaintance; corroboration; murder and attempted murder convictions; acquittal on firearm/ammunition charges due to defective particulars and lack of ballistic/forensic linkage.
|
21 January 2026 |
|
Court allowed a supplementary founding affidavit in pension-fund review proceedings, citing s30P procedural flexibility and no demonstrated prejudice.
Pension Funds Act s30P – review proceedings – supplementary affidavits – court's discretion to admit further evidence – unopposed application on affidavit – heads of argument not evidence – prejudice and interests of justice.
|
20 January 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where Rule 46A application was dismissed for procedural non‑compliance and the order was not appealable.
Civil procedure — Appealability — Superior Courts Act s16(1)(a) — Zweni triad (finality, definitiveness, disposal of substantial portion) — interests of justice — Rule 46A service requirements — procedural dismissal not appealable; leave to appeal refused with costs.
|
20 January 2026 |
|
Relocation refused: immediate removal to Zimbabwe not in children's best interests; contact protected and Family Advocate to report.
Children — Care and Contact — Relocation application — Best interests of the child — Applicant resident abroad intending to return to Ireland — Children born and settled in South Africa — Parental responsibilities — Family Advocate report — Anti‑alienation injunction — Interim contact regime.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Applicant’s urgent review struck from the roll for self-created delay; PAJA not a ground to await written reasons; punitive costs ordered.
Administrative law – urgency under Rule 6(12) – self-created urgency – PAJA and reasons for administrative action – Exchange Control Regulations – voluminous matters and special allocation – commercial prejudice insufficient without exceptional circumstances – punitive costs.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Former directors may seek rescission of a winding‑up order, but weak merits meant the stay was refused and costs awarded in the winding‑up.
Company Law – Rescission of winding‑up order – Locus to apply post‑winding‑up – Former directors may apply for rescission without liquidator; service at registered address valid; prescription runs from call up on default; National Credit Act not applicable to juristic person exceeding thresholds; winding‑up properly founded on failure to answer statutory demand (s345(1)(a)); no prima facie right to rescission; costs to be paid in winding‑up.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: alleged electronic verification defect failed to show loan invalidity; executability and attorney‑client costs upheld.
Leave to appeal — section 17(1) Superior Courts Act — reasonable prospects test; Contract validity — electronic/fingerprint verification alleged to vitiate long‑standing loan agreement; Service of process — substituted service and participation cure defects; Primary residence — sheriff’s return as prima facie evidence; Rule 46A — executability, reserve price, negative equity and municipal debt; Certificate of balance — basis for monetary judgment; Attorney–client costs in mortgage/default judgment matters.
|
18 January 2026 |
|
Bail appeal dismissed where appellant failed to discharge onus amid serious alleged violence and risk to witnesses.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Onus on accused to show interests of justice favour release – Serious violence and risk to complainants and witnesses – Alleged assault on police – Right to silence in bail proceedings – Enforceability of bail conditions – Pre‑trial detention delay.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
Sections 30–31 do not require co-holder consent to enrol a child; court orders enrolment closer to home in child’s best interests.
Children’s Act — sections 30 and 31 — exercise of parental responsibilities and rights — whether consent of co-holder required to enrol child at school — major decisions and due regard to views but no consent veto; best interests of the child; expert (Voice of the Child) report; improper withholding of consent as leverage over maintenance.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
The applicant’s demand under an on‑demand advance payment guarantee was enforceable; fraud not proven, insurer liable.
Bank and insurance guarantees – Advance payment guarantee – On‑demand/autonomous nature – Compliance with demand provisions – recoupment schedule – fraud exception to enforcement – proof required – Performance guarantee and deeds of indemnity/suretyship – cancellation of underlying contract does not automatically discharge guarantee.
|
15 January 2026 |
|
Summary judgment granted where respondents failed to establish a bona fide defence to a pay‑now‑sue‑later contractual claim.
Contract — summary judgment — pay‑now‑sue‑later clause and clause excluding reliance on representations — inspection and notice requirements for defective goods — alleged fraudulent misrepresentation must be particularised and bona fide to defeat summary judgment.
|
15 January 2026 |
|
Matter not ripe for quantum adjudication due to failure to comply with Practice Directive set‑down and practice‑note requirements.
Civil procedure — Road Accident Fund — Default judgment matters — Practice Directive 1 of 2024 (as amended) — Peremptory requirement for notice of set-down, practice note and heads of argument — Case management — Procedural irregularity requires directions and removal from roll rather than adjudication of quantum.
|
15 January 2026 |
|
Warrantless arrest lawful where objective reasonable suspicion existed; hearsay may justify suspicion and failure to call arresting officer not fatal.
Criminal procedure — warrantless arrest — s 40(1)(b) CPA — reasonable suspicion may be based on hearsay — documentary statements in police docket admissible to show information available to arresting officer — failure to call arresting officer not necessarily fatal — no adverse inference.
|
14 January 2026 |
|
Taxations conducted in the applicant’s absence without proper Rule 4A(1)(c)/Rule 70 service were set aside.
Taxation of costs — service of notice — Rule 70(3B) and 70(4)(a)/(b) — Taxing Master's duty to be satisfied of due notice — Electronic service — Rule 4A(1)(c) requires consent, address provided and proof of receipt — CaseLines upload insufficient — Allocators granted in absence set aside.
|
13 January 2026 |
|
Applicant’s Rule 43 maintenance claims dismissed for material non-disclosure; children’s contact/residence referred to Family Advocate.
Family law – Rule 43 interim relief – duty of full, frank and honest disclosure in Rule 43 applications – material non-disclosure justifies refusal of interim maintenance; contribution to legal costs requires demonstration of duty of support, need, and respondent’s means; complex maintenance matters may be referred to Maintenance Act machinery; referral of child contact/residence to Family Advocate for best-interests investigation.
|
13 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff's contractual rental claim survives exception; its 'legitimate expectation' patrimonial-loss claim discloses no cause of action and is struck out.
Contract law – Pleadings – exception for vagueness and failure to disclose a cause of action; Contract interpretation – ambiguity of clause obliging party to 'manage the lease'; Administrative law – legitimate expectation distinct from contractual rights; Delict – patrimonial loss claim based on 'legitimate expectation' inadequate; Pleadings – strike out of claim that conflates contractual, administrative and delictual concepts; Leave to amend granted.
|
12 January 2026 |
|
Court postponed the claim because unexplained documentary inconsistencies prevented a safe finding on liability.
Road Accident Fund claim – documentary inconsistencies in accident report, medical records and expert reports – reliability and coherence of evidential foundation – plaintiff’s burden to prove negligence and causation – damages not adjudicable absent established liability – leave to cure evidential deficiencies; matter postponed sine die.
|
9 January 2026 |
|
Court made RAF settlement an order, awarding quantified loss of support, trust for minors, costs, and invalidating contingency fee agreement.
Settlement agreements — enforcement as court orders under Eke v Parsons — RAF claims — default procedure (Rule 32/38(2)) — quantification of loss of support — establishment and terms of trust for minors — costs and invalidation of contingency fee agreement.
|
9 January 2026 |
|
Court refused to make an incomplete RAF settlement an order, requiring clarification of liability and damages.
Civil procedure — Settlement agreements — Incorporation as court order — Eke v Parsons criteria — RAF claims — Settlement must record liability and disposition of damages — Court may not rewrite agreements — Rule 38(2) determination where defendant non-compliant.
|
9 January 2026 |
|
Default judgment cannot be granted without proof that a compelling order was served and the defendant failed to comply.
Civil procedure — Default judgment — Uniform Rule 31(2)(a) and Rule 37(8) — Striking out defence for non‑attendance at compelled pre‑trial conference — Requirement of clear proof of service of compelling order — audi alteram partem safeguard — Procedural default must be established on the papers.
|
9 January 2026 |
|
Court refused default judgment due to unexplained documentary inconsistencies and granted leave to supplement evidence.
Road Accident Fund – default judgment – burden of proof lies on plaintiff to prove negligence and causation before quantum – material documentary inconsistencies (AR numbers, dates, alterations, lack of scene sketch) undermining reliability – leave granted to cure evidential deficiencies by affidavit – matter postponed sine die and leave to re-enrol.
|
9 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff cannot obtain default judgment on quantum without proper set‑down and a compliant practice note under Practice Directive 1 of 2024.
Road Accident Fund matters — Default judgment — Practice Directive 1 of 2024 (as amended) — Peremptory practice‑note and enrolment requirements — Striking out defence does not entitle immediate adjudication of quantum — Case management and regularisation required.
|
9 January 2026 |
|
Bail pending appeal refused because applicant is a flight risk and lacks lawful immigration status, risking commission of a Schedule 1 offence.
Criminal procedure — Bail pending appeal — Interaction of s321 and s60(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act — Flight risk and evasion of sentence — Immigration status and commission of Schedule 1 offence — SCA referral for leave to appeal does not itself establish exceptional circumstances.
|
5 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff’s liability claim in hit‑and‑run dismissed for now due to material defects in the accident report and evidence; leave to supplement.
Road Accident Fund — hit‑and‑run collision — admissibility and sufficiency of accident report — material defects in AR and witness statements — uncertified, non‑chronological medical records — onus of proof and default judgment not automatic — leave to supplement evidential record.
|
5 January 2026 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove negligence due to material deficiencies in accident report and supporting evidence; leave to supplement granted.
Road Accident Fund – s19(f) claim – hit‑and‑run collision – insufficiency and admissibility of accident report and witness statements – uncertified/unsorted medical records – default judgment not automatic – leave to supplement evidential record and re‑enrolment.
|
5 January 2026 |