Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

High Court of South Africa North Gauteng, Pretoria

The Gauteng Division of the High Court of South Africa is a superior court of law which has general jurisdiction over the South African province of Gauteng and the eastern part of North West province. The main seat of the division is at Pretoria, while a local seat at Johannesburg has concurrent jurisdiction over the southern parts of Gauteng. 

6 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
6 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 2020
LA C v S (A6/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 6 (15 December 2020)
15 December 2020
Seboka and Another v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others (2022-39227) [2020] ZAGPPHC 3 (9 December 2020)
Minister lawfully removed acting sheriffs for failing to hold required Fidelity Fund Certificates; PAJA did not invalidate that decision.
Administrative law – PAJA applies to decisions of the Board for Sheriffs to issue or refuse Fidelity Fund Certificates – Acting sheriffs required to hold Fidelity Fund Certificates – Minister’s removal of acting sheriffs for non‑compliance upheld where proper consultation and consideration occurred – No review where decision not arbitrary or tainted by undue influence.
 9 December 2020
September 2020
Bigen Africa Group Holdings (Pty) Limited v Nemai Consulting (Pty) Limited and Another (61282/2021) [2020] ZAGPPHC 2 (8 September 2020)
Application to make arbitral award an order of court stayed pending B‑BBEE Commission investigation into alleged fronting.
Arbitration Act s31 – application to make an arbitral award an order of court – stay pending related regulatory investigation. B‑BBEE Act – allegation of 'fronting' may affect enforceability of contracts and arbitral awards (Cool Ideas principle). Interaction of regulatory investigations and court enforcement of arbitration awards – prudential stay to avoid pre‑judging specialist tribunal processes.
 8 September 2020
June 2020
First Rand Bank Ltd v Ludick (A 277 / 2019; NCT /112239/2018/141) [2020] ZAGPPHC 5 (18 June 2020)
Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to set aside credit agreements not validly referred and could not ignore the statutory three‑year bar.
Consumer credit — National Credit Act — jurisdiction of National Consumer Tribunal — referral by National Credit Regulator — notice of non-referral must be in Form 31 — Tribunal may only adjudicate matters properly referred — statutory three‑year bar for referral is peremptory — ultra vires determination and setting aside of credit agreements.
 18 June 2020
April 2020
SCF Capital Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Development Bank of Southern Africa Ltd and Others (84780/17) [2020] ZAGPPHC 4 (20 April 2020)
Applicant failed to prove a creditor negative vote was inappropriate; business rescue set aside and proceedings discontinued.
Companies Act – Business rescue – Section 153(1)(a)(ii) and 153(7) – setting aside negative vote – court must assess whether it is reasonable and just to set aside vote having regard to interests of those who voted against and realistic prospects of plan’s implementation. Fund administrator/facility agreement – pilot project with fixed term – termination (clause 18.4) and return of cash/investments to funder. Debtor-book valuation – reliance on practitioner’s information, qualified valuation and need for independent, verifiable valuation. Procedural compliance – practitioner’s duties after negative vote (adjournment, consider binding offers, apply to court). Conflict of interest and transparency concerns – practitioner’s associations and communications relevant but did not establish setting aside of vote.
 20 April 2020
January 2020
Rensburg and Others v South African Legal Practice Council (69359/2019; 69360/2019; 69361/2019; 69362/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 1 (16 January 2020)
Reported
16 January 2020