|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2022 |
|
|
Respondent validly cancelled the franchise for breach of stockholding/performance; applicant accepted cancellation by conduct.
* Franchise law – cancellation for breach – Minimum stockholding and performance standards (clauses 12.36 & 29) – Franchisor entitled to cancel for non-compliance.
* Franchise agreements – directives and ordering system changes – directives permitted by contract do not amount to unilateral amendment or repudiation.
* Contract – election by conduct – franchisee’s post-notice communications and acts amounted to acceptance of termination.
* Restraint of trade – reasonableness assessed when enforcement is sought; not adjudicated where not enforced.
* Civil procedure – party cannot rely on unpleaded Consumer Protection Act defence in motion proceedings.
* Contractual accounting/audit obligations – unaudited certifications complied with clause 8.3.2.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
Court orders insurer to supply particulars of alleged undisclosed prior claims as strictly necessary for defendants' trial preparation.
* Civil procedure – Rule 21(2) – further particulars – court may compel particulars strictly necessary to enable a party to prepare for trial; * Insurance – alleged non-disclosure of prior claims by broker/employee – particulars about number, dates, insurers, outcomes and notice; * Costs – late filing causing postponement – wasted costs awarded against party responsible.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
A date error in the charge sheet did not prejudice the appellant; convictions and 15-year sentences were upheld.
Criminal procedure – essentials of a charge (s84 CPA) – date discrepancies – prejudice requirement; Right to fair trial – informed of charge; Evidence – identification in daylight where complainants knew accused; Sexual offences – unlawful touching during search constitutes sexual violation; Sentencing – prescribed minimum sentences and absence of substantial and compelling circumstances.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
An inordinate, unexplained delay in prosecuting a claim justified dismissal for want of prosecution and costs.
Civil procedure – dismissal for want of prosecution – inordinate and inexcusable delay – prejudice to defendant – court’s inherent jurisdiction and interests of justice – condonation not established.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
Whether the agreements constituted credit agreements under the National Credit Act and were therefore unlawful and unenforceable.
National Credit Act – s 8 and s 40 – credit agreement defined – deferred payment falling within s 8(4); registration requirement under s 40(1) – unregistered credit provider renders agreement unlawful and unenforceable under s 89; novation/substitution – replacement of prior contract bars revival; inchoate agreements – incompleteness and effect on enforceability; pleadings – inability to rely on an unpleaded settlement defence.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
Payment to a subsequent cessionary after notice of a prior cession does not discharge the debtor absent estoppel.
Cession – Payment after notice of prior cession – Effect of payment to subsequent cessionary – Protection of blameless debtor – estoppel – Insolvency and ceded proceeds of crop sale.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
Court awarded damages for injuries, found plaintiff functionally unemployable and accepted uncontested expert reports.
* Delict — passenger pushed from moving train — liability admitted (90%) — quantum only.
* Quantum — general damages, past and future loss of earnings, future medical expenses.
* Evidence — admitted expert reports; weight of uncontested expert evidence; joint minutes.
* Employability — functional unemployability found; 20% residual capacity rejected.
* Contingencies — actuarial calculations and appropriate discounts applied.
* Costs — taxed or agreed High Court scale costs including specified expert and counsel fees.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
A tribunal panel’s lack of accounting expertise does not automatically invalidate its decision; the exchange may direct restatement of financial statements.
Administrative law; Tribunal composition – FSR Act ss220, 224, 225 – no automatic requirement for accounting-qualified panellist on every reconsideration; Securities regulation – JSE Listing Requirement 8.65 and Financial Markets Act empower corrective directives including restatement; Company law – business judgment rule protects directors from liability but does not excuse non-compliance with IFRS; Procedural fairness – party may call witnesses and Tribunal may rely on expert evidence.
|
7 November 2022 |
|
|
4 November 2022 |
|
Urgent application for stay and discovery under the Protected Disclosures Act struck from roll for lack of urgency; costs awarded against State.
Protected Disclosures Act; urgency—Uniform Rule 6(12) requirements (trigger event and absence of substantial redress); self-created urgency; failure to pursue discovery pre‑litigation; Biowatch principle and costs against State.
|
4 November 2022 |
|
Court allowed plea amendment to include commission report extracts, finding no mala fides or incurable prejudice.
Civil procedure – Uniform Rule 28 – amendment of pleadings; defamation – incorporation of Commission/Inquiry report into plea; relevance and public-domain reports; prejudice as determining factor; mala fides and costs remedial; excipiability arguable at trial.
|
4 November 2022 |
|
Default judgment appropriate where respondents failed to plead after a notice of bar and offered only unsupported bare denials.
* Civil procedure – default judgment – notice of bar – ipso facto bar where defendant fails to plead; bare, late denials unsupported by affidavit do not constitute a real triable issue and do not justify upliftment of bar or postponement.
|
3 November 2022 |
|
Rescission refused: judgment validly granted after personal service and applicant's late affidavit is a nullity.
Rule 42(1) – rescission for judgment erroneously sought or granted; Rule 46A enforcement against primary residence – personal service and procedural compliance; late answering affidavit post-judgment is nullity; no obligation on creditor to serve compliance directive affidavit; costs awarded on ordinary scale (Biowatch).
|
3 November 2022 |
|
|
2 November 2022 |
|
Whether the CPA applies to a financed second-hand vehicle sale and the appropriate scope of refund and penalty.
Consumer Protection Act – applicability to financed vehicle sales; supplier liability for implied warranty of quality (s55(2)(c)) and repair/replace/refund remedy (s56(3)); limits of statutory qualification (s55(6)); court/tribunal power to craft practical orders under s4(2)(b)(ii)(bb); administrative fines under s112 and judicial review of discretion.
|
2 November 2022 |
|
Court dismissed challenge to ex parte curatorship procedure as academic where no live dispute existed and s5(1) already requires good cause.
* Administrative law – curatorship of medical schemes – ex parte applications under s5(1) Financial Institutions (Protection of Funds) Act – requirement that ex parte relief be on good cause shown.
* Civil procedure – res judicata and lis pendens – when same cause of action may support distinct remedies; pending appeal does not automatically bar separate proceedings.
* Constitutional/Declaratory relief – section 21(1)(c) Superior Courts Act – court may refuse declaratory relief where no live lis exists or issue is academic/moot.
* Mootness/justiciability – withdrawal of impugned ex parte application and parties’ agreement rendered the challenge hypothetical.
|
2 November 2022 |
|
|
1 November 2022 |
|
A collateral challenge fails where the impugned regulation applies to municipalities, not the accused, and is not an element of the criminal charges.
Administrative law — collateral challenge to validity of administrative act — available only where act constitutes basis for coercive action against challenger; municipal investment regulation — Regulation 6(c) limits municipal investments to Banks Act banks and applies to municipalities/municipal entities/investment managers only; criminal indictment referencing regulation as background does not make regulation an element of offences — collateral challenge not competent; locus standi and condonation refused.
|
1 November 2022 |
|
A company’s name or ownership change does not create a new entity; Registrar must record a valid notification of a new responsible person.
* Company law – juristic person retains identity despite change of shareholders or name where registration number unchanged – effect on licences. * Firearms Control Act – notification of change of responsible person (SAPS 521(e)) is a statutory notification (section 38/7(4)), not an appealable decision under section 133. * Administrative law – Registrar obliged to update Central Firearms Registry records when a valid notification is submitted. * Procedural – urgency established where refusal to update records prevents trading.
|
1 November 2022 |