|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| August 2022 |
|
|
Provisional sequestration granted where default judgment, execution returns and deed records showed respondent's insolvency despite opposition.
Sequestration — provisional sequestration granted where magistrate's default judgment and execution returns show inability to pay; managing agent authorised to sue on body corporate's behalf; Ombud procedures not exclusive remedy.
|
30 August 2022 |
|
Court set aside respondent’s defective notice and amended particulars as an irregular step and directed compliant amendment procedure.
Civil procedure – amendment of pleadings – Notice of intention to amend – defective service as irregular step – Rule 28(4) leave to amend – Rule 28(10) deemed leave – extension of time – self‑represented litigant – costs in the cause.
|
30 August 2022 |
|
Rescission of winding‑up refused for substantial compliance with service; business rescue refused for lack of prospects, disclosure and procedural compliance.
Companies law – Winding‑up: s 346(4A) (1973 Act) – substantial compliance with service at registered address sufficient in context; Rescission under rule 42(1) – not established. Companies law – Business rescue: s 131(4) (2008 Act) – applicant must show company is financially distressed (not already insolvent), reasonable prospects of rescue, full disclosure and service on affected persons; failure to disclose creditors/assets and speculative rescue plan fatal.
|
29 August 2022 |
|
Applicant failed to show good cause or a bona fide defence; condonation and rescission were dismissed with attorney-and-client costs.
• Civil procedure – rescission of default judgment – condonation under Rule 27(1) – requirement to show good cause, bona fides and prima facie defence (Du Plooy test).
• Non-compliance with court directive to obtain legal representation or apply for postponement – failure to explain non-compliance fatal to condonation.
• Evidence credibility – inconsistent witness statements undermining asserted defence.
• Costs – attorney-and-client costs appropriate where there is reckless disregard of court rules.
|
29 August 2022 |
|
Court orders interim payment of Elaprase as PMB for MPS II, finding urgency and prima facie entitlement.
Medical schemes – Prescribed Minimum Benefits (PMBs) – rare disease (MPS II) – interpretation of ‘prevailing/predominant public hospital practice’ for PMB treatment; interim relief – urgency and irreparable harm – admissibility of replying evidence; scheme obligation to authorize and pay Elaprase as PMB pending CMS complaint.
|
26 August 2022 |
|
Court quantified future loss of earnings, rejecting speculative further studies and applying higher contingency for injured scenario.
* Delict – quantification of loss of earnings and future earning capacity – necessity of factual basis for hypothetical increased qualifications and earnings.
* Evidentiary assessment – weight of expert reports (OT, neurosurgeon, neuropsychologist, industrial psychologist, actuary).
* Computation – application of contingency deductions to present value in injured and uninjured scenarios; apportionment of damages according to admitted liability.
|
26 August 2022 |
|
Exception upheld: indemnity claim inadequately pleaded and must be amended to show nexus and particularity.
Civil procedure – exception for failure to disclose cause of action; indemnity claims – requirement to plead nexus between anticipated loss and indemnifier’s obligation; Rule 18(4) – pleadings must state material facts with sufficient particularity; declaratory relief – impracticable where no claim exists against the plaintiff.
|
25 August 2022 |
|
Contractor entitled to time extension and R4.76m where employer's failure to nominate subcontractor caused delay and notice was timely.
Construction contract – delay – employer's failure to nominate subcontractor – contractor's notice obligation (20 working days) – when contractor became or ought to have become aware – contractual compensation methodology (JBCC Option A) – adverse costs for untenable defence.
|
24 August 2022 |
|
Application postponed sine die; court ordered specified document disclosure and delivery of occupation certificate; costs each to bear own.
Procedure – postponement sine die; disclosure – production of specified documents in CaseLines bundle (A325–A327); obligation to deliver occupation certificate within one week of disclosure; costs – each party to pay own.
|
24 August 2022 |
|
|
24 August 2022 |
|
Email service in urgent proceedings was permissible; rescission for lack of service dismissed with costs.
* Administrative/tender law – review and rescission of judgment – service of process by electronic mail during COVID-19 lockdown; * Civil procedure – electronic service in urgent proceedings; Rule 6(12) discretion to dispense with ordinary service; * Judge President’s Directive item 5 – condonation for electronic exchange; does not preclude electronic service absent agreement; * Requirement for effective service (fact-based) versus form of service; no referral to oral evidence where no real dispute on papers.
|
24 August 2022 |
|
DG’s failure to decide internal appeal is reviewable; prospecting renewal runs from date of notification.
* Administrative law – PAJA – failure to take a decision by an administrator is reviewable; * Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act – s16–18, s96 – internal appeal procedure; * Prospecting rights – duration and renewal – Mawetse principle: period computed from date of notification of grant; * Competence of appeal to Minister – appeal only lies where Director-General has made an administrative decision; * Remedy – compelled performance to decide appropriate, substitution inappropriate where it would oust statutory appeal role.
|
24 August 2022 |
|
Applicants’ rescission late and dismissed for unreasonable delay; incorrectly typed writ set aside, execution may proceed on corrected order.
Civil procedure – Rescission of default judgment – Rule 42, Rule 31(2)(b) and common law – reasonable time and condonation; service at former domicilium; excipiable particulars; typist error in court order; setting aside writ.
|
24 August 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal granted because Rule 46(A)’s application to corporate/trust-owned primary residences raises reasonable prospects of success.
* Civil procedure – leave to appeal – section 17(1) Superior Courts Act – higher threshold: appeal 'would' have reasonable prospect of success.* Uniform Rules – Rule 46(A) – judicial oversight over sales in execution and requirement to set a reserve price for primary residences.* Application of Rule 46(A) to properties owned by close corporations, companies or trusts.* Interaction of Mokebe and Folscher with recent SCA authority (Bestbier) as compelling reason to hear appeal.
|
23 August 2022 |
|
Amended particulars cured prior excipiability; allegations of unlawful disposals and breaches of fiduciary duty were sufficiently pleaded, application dismissed with costs.
• Civil procedure – Exception to particulars of claim – Whether amended particulars cured excipiability and complied with Rule 18(6).
• Pleadings – sufficiency and particularity – allegations that agents disposed of municipal property for personal gain, sales below market value and resale for profit.
• Pleadings – joinder/role of defendants – when partners/directors and an auctioneering entity may be jointly and severally liable.
• Alternative claims – formulation and clarity of alternative Claim 2.
• Relief – striking out and absolution from instance refused; costs awarded against defendants.
|
23 August 2022 |
|
An interlocutory application by an unrepresented applicant was an abuse of process and was struck from the roll.
Civil procedure – interlocutory application – abuse of process; interlocutory relief rendered moot by lapse of contract; unrepresented litigant; costs reserved for case management; active judicial case management to prevent unnecessary interlocutory litigation.
|
23 August 2022 |
|
A Rule 27(6) recorded settlement is not a transactio; respondent may obtain Rule 27(9) relief on default.
Magistrates’ Court Rules — Rule 27(6), Rule 27(8), Rule 27(9) — Effect of recording a settlement — Suspension of action versus transactio — Right to fall back on original cause on default — Entry of judgment under Rule 27(9) — Costs following success.
|
22 August 2022 |
|
|
22 August 2022 |
|
|
22 August 2022 |
|
Use of guidelines not in force at application time rendered appeal decision unlawful; appeal upheld and grant ordered paid.
Administrative law – review of adjudicatory decision – impermissible retrospective application of later guidelines; MCEP – applicable guideline is that in force at time of application; procedural fairness – failure to consider appeal evidence; costs – attorney-and-client scale for unreasonable administrative prevarication.
|
18 August 2022 |
|
|
18 August 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where ex tempore reasons were adequate, recusal and improper citation were unfounded, and costs were awarded.
* Civil procedure – ex tempore judgment – no statutory duty to provide further written reasons where a comprehensive ex tempore judgment is transcribed and available.
* Civil procedure – recusal and citation of judge – judge should not be cited as respondent; recusal applications are interlocutory and must follow proper procedure.
* Appeal – leave to appeal – application must show reasonable prospects of success under s17 of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013.
* Costs – court may award costs against an unrepresented litigant where conduct causes unnecessary delay and prejudice.
|
17 August 2022 |
|
Group branding does not make the holding company liable; plaintiff sued the wrong entity.
* Contract law – mis-joinder: determination of the true contracting party by reference to purchase orders, invoicing and payment conduct.
* Civil procedure – non-joinder and misnomer: plaintiff’s election not to join or substitute the true party is fatal to claim against wrongly sued entity.
* Corporate law – piercing the corporate veil: common law and s 20(9) Companies Act require impropriety or unconscionable abuse of juristic personality; group branding alone insufficient.
* Pleadings – correction of citation: misnomer may be curable, but substantive evidence controls who is contractually liable.
|
17 August 2022 |
|
The court set aside an invalid procurement contract to prevent unjust enrichment and ordered the applicant to pay costs.
Procurement law — Contract invalidity — Remedy under s 172(1)(b) — Whether to set aside invalid contract or leave declaration intact — Prevention of unjust enrichment — Claims for future loss — Costs follow the cause.
|
17 August 2022 |
|
|
17 August 2022 |
|
|
16 August 2022 |
|
|
16 August 2022 |
|
A separate arbitration agreement can survive a void underlying contract and validate the arbitrator’s award between the parties.
Arbitration — separability and survivability of arbitration agreements; whether a separate arbitration agreement can replace an arbitration clause in a void contract; arbitrator’s jurisdiction to decide validity of underlying contract; interpretation of 'to the extent necessary' substitution clauses; enforcement of arbitration awards under s31 of the Arbitration Act.
|
16 August 2022 |
|
|
15 August 2022 |
|
Leave granted to appeal dismissal of interlocutory Rule 30A application; reasonable prospect another court would differ.
• Civil procedure – leave to appeal – s17(1) Superior Courts Act – test whether another court would reasonably reach a different decision.
• Civil procedure – interlocutory orders – appealability and Zweni criteria (finality, definitiveness, disposal of substantial relief).
• Uniform Rules of Court – interplay between Rule 35 (production/discovery) and Rule 30A (remedies for non-compliance); scope of Rule 30A(2) versus Rule 35(13).
• Precedent – status of prior decisions within the Division and whether a single judge is bound to follow them.
|
15 August 2022 |
|
The applicant's last‑minute postponement was refused and the respondent granted eviction where the lease had expired by effluxion of time.
Lease – dispute as to commencement date; eviction where lease expired by effluxion of time; last‑minute postponement/exceptions; postponement refused; remainder of counterclaim postponed sine die; costs in the cause.
|
12 August 2022 |
|
Lockdown and RAF office closures made timely lodging impossible, so prescription did not bar the plaintiff’s RAF claim.
* Road Accident Fund Act – prescription of RAF claims – statutory two-year time limit for unidentified driver claims – impact of COVID‑19 lockdown restrictions and RAF office closures on ability to lodge claims.
* Constitutional/impossibility principle – lex non cogit ad impossibilia – application to excuse non‑compliance with statutory time limits where objective impossibility exists (Van Zyl NO v RAF).
* Interaction between RAF Act and Prescription Act – RAF Act tailored for RAF claims but impossibility may nevertheless suspend running of prescription.
* Duty to mitigate – public bodies’ obligation to provide alternative means to receive claims during lockdown.
|
12 August 2022 |
|
Applicant’s initial interdict was arguable, but prolonged post-answering delay justified attorney-and-client costs against him.
Costs — attorney-and-client costs — exceptional and punitive, justified where losing party’s post‑filing conduct is unreasonable and causes unnecessary expense; Interdict — institution justified where applicant unaware of final rezoning approval; Withdrawal under Rule 45(1)(a) — granted with costs consequences; Timing of administrative approvals — relevance to merits and costs.
|
10 August 2022 |
|
Appellant’s personal circumstances were not substantial and compelling to justify departing from mandatory life imprisonment.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum sentences – Rape in Part 1 of Schedule 2 attracting life imprisonment under s51(1)(a) – requirement of substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate – appellate review of sentencing discretion.
|
8 August 2022 |
|
Youthfulness and cumulative personal circumstances can constitute substantial and compelling reasons to depart from prescribed life sentence.
Criminal law – minimum sentences – s51(1)(a) Criminal Law Amendment Act – substantial and compelling circumstances – youthfulness, immaturity and cumulative personal circumstances may justify deviation; belief in witchcraft not automatically mitigating where accused is integrated into modern society.
|
8 August 2022 |
|
Master may appoint co-liquidators absent a gazetted policy if discretion aligns with section 15(1A)’s purposive objectives.
Companies Act – sections 368 and 374 – Master’s discretion to appoint provisional liquidators and co-liquidators – requirement to act "in accordance with policy determined by the Minister" read purposively with section 15(1A) – appointments lawful absent extant gazetted policy if exercised consistently with policy purpose (consistency, fairness, transparency, equality for previously disadvantaged persons). Costs – punitive order where challenge is self-serving and no creditor prejudice shown.
|
8 August 2022 |
|
|
4 August 2022 |
|
Whether the Tribunal lawfully declared simulated sale–lease agreements reckless and improperly delegated investigative and adjudicative powers to an auditor.
* Credit law – simulation – sale-and-lease-back arrangements that in substance constitute credit transactions under the National Credit Act. * Civil procedure – application on papers – Plascon-Evans principle applicable where denials do not raise bona fide factual disputes. * Administrative/adjudicative powers – limits on Tribunal’s remedial orders; may not delegate determination of recklessness or reimbursement to an auditor; proper separation of investigative (Regulator), investigatory reporting (auditor) and adjudicative (Tribunal) roles. * Sanctions – must be clear, limited in scope and not affect non-participating consumers without proper evidence.
|
4 August 2022 |
|
Applicant entitled to interim maintenance contribution and respondent ordered to contribute to dependent adult child's medical aid.
Family law – Maintenance pendente lite – contribution to joint household expenses – spouses’ duty to contribute according to income; Rule 43 – pleading and proof of need for interim maintenance; Parental maintenance – claim on behalf of adult dependent child; Non‑disclosure of income – adverse credibility and impact on relief.
|
3 August 2022 |
|
Defendant rail operator held fully liable after passenger was robbed and pushed from a moving train due to open doors and overcrowding.
Public transport — Rail operator’s duty to ensure commuter safety; negligence where passengers are pushed from moving train through open doors; probative value of direct eyewitness testimony versus circumstantial post-incident evidence; liability despite overcrowding; quantum postponed sine die.
|
3 August 2022 |
|
|
3 August 2022 |
|
Pending expert inquiry, primary residence awarded to the applicant; contact curtailed due to respondent's alcohol use; interim maintenance and R50,000 legal-costs contribution ordered.
Family law – Rule 43 proceedings – interim primary residence and contact pending expert best-interests investigation; alcohol use as factor in curtailing contact; pendente lite maintenance and contribution to legal costs (R50,000).
|
3 August 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal refused; divorce costs not automatically charged to joint estate and liquidator may employ lawyers.
* Insolvency/liquidation – Amended final account – Objections to inclusion or exclusion of legal costs arising from matrimonial proceedings.
* Family law/estate administration – Whether divorce costs incurred before division of joint estate automatically attract a claim against the joint estate.
* Liquidator’s powers – Interpretation of power to "engage the services of any suitably qualified person" as including lawyers and entitlement to incur legal costs.
* Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – procedural defects in scope of appeal and prospects of success.
|
2 August 2022 |
|
Reported
Admitting a pre‑sentence report based on an abandoned s105A agreement vitiated sentencing; appeal upheld and sentence remitted.
Criminal procedure – Plea and sentence agreements (s105A) – s105A(10) nullifies agreement and forbids reference to negotiations/records in de novo proceedings absent accused's consent; inadmissibility of pre‑sentence report compiled from abandoned 105A agreement; probation officer evidence; miscarriage of justice vitiating sentence; remit for fresh sentencing.
|
2 August 2022 |
|
Leave to appeal refused; FSCA investigation set aside for procedural unfairness and certain investigators excluded.
Administrative law – Review of investigatory action – Procedural fairness and natural justice – PAJA applicability – Duty to disclose documents prior to compelled questioning – Exclusion of investigators lacking appropriate expertise.
|
1 August 2022 |
|
An oral fuel-supply agreement was tacitly at the applicant's published list price; applicant awarded outstanding balance, counterclaim dismissed.
Close corporation agency – member authority to bind – ostensible authority; Contract law – tacit/implied terms – "innocent bystander" test; Petroleum industry – zone/list price vs purchase price plus handling margin; Onus and credibility in proving contract terms; Counterclaim for price difference dismissed.
|
1 August 2022 |
|
High Court dismisses Rule 6(12)(c) reconsideration where respondents wilfully absented themselves; condonation granted.
Employment law; jurisdiction of High Court versus Labour Court – contractual enforcement in High Court; Rule 6(12)(c) reconsideration – requirement that order was granted in respondent's absence (non-wilful); duty of utmost good faith in ex parte proceedings and non-disclosure; locus standi of CEO to represent state entity; condonation for late filing; costs—including punitive reserved costs.
|
1 August 2022 |
|
General damages postponed for lack of RAF acceptance; loss of earnings dismissed as plaintiff was a pensioner.
* Road Accident Fund Act s17/Regulation 3 – serious-injury assessment; administrative acceptance by RAF as a jurisdictional fact for general damages.
* General damages – narrative test vs. 30% WPI threshold; court may not determine quantum absent RAF acceptance.
* Post-trial tender or correspondence not pleaded does not substitute for statutory acceptance.
* Loss of earnings – claimant must prove diminished earning capacity; pre-accident retirement/pension may negate claim.
* Costs – discretion; parties’ conduct relevant to costs order.
|
1 August 2022 |