|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2026 |
|
|
A suspensive condition was not fulfilled; the joint venture never arose and the plaintiffs' claim for commission/accounting was dismissed.
Contract interpretation — parol evidence and factual matrix; suspensive condition — effect of non-fulfilment on contract formation; joint venture formation — onus to plead and prove oral terms; entitlement to commission dependent on contract actually coming into effect.
|
27 February 2026 |
|
Plea struck out for failing to plead a claim in reconvention and material facts; attorney's right of appearance not fatal.
Civil procedure – Rule 30A application – claim in reconvention – Rule 24(1) – failure to plead material facts per Rule 18 – signature by attorney with right of appearance – striking out plea – costs.
|
27 February 2026 |
|
Second business rescue application dismissed for failure to prove reasonable prospects of rescue or better creditor return.
Companies Act s131(1),(4),(5) – business rescue – reasonable prospects test (Oakdene) – property‑holding, non‑trading companies – lapsed/conditional offers – creditors’ interests prevail – informal winding‑up concern.
|
27 February 2026 |
|
Review dismissed as moot despite conceded regulatory illegality; adverse attorney-and-client costs awarded against respondents.
Administrative law – review under PAJA/principle of legality – licence granted in contravention of regulatory prohibition (Reg 7(c)) – mootness and justiciability – doctrine of unclean hands (not decided) – punitive costs (attorney-and-client; de bonis propriis) for respondent misconduct.
|
20 February 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal granted on multiple grounds including possession, territorial extent, MPRDA conflict and exercise of discretion in spoliation relief.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal (s 17, Superior Courts Act) – mandament van spolie – elements of possession (physical and animus) – territorial definition by aerial annexure – interaction between mandament van spolie and MPRDA (s 54) – liens – exercise of judicial discretion in urgent spoliation relief – mootness/standing where contracting party changed.
|
6 February 2026 |
|
Appellate court set aside a 15-year minimum sentence where statutory value thresholds for s 51(2) were not met, imposing 18 months.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum sentences under s 51(2) Criminal Law Amendment Act – Statutory thresholds for dependence-producing substances – Material misdirection vitiating sentencing discretion – Zinn triad and re-sentencing – Disproportionate 15-year sentence set aside.
|
6 February 2026 |
|
Execution of reinstatement order pending appeal granted due to exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm.
Superior Courts Act s18 – execution pending appeal – exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm required; non‑compliance with Local Government Disciplinary Regulation 6(2) – suspension of municipal manager; substantial compliance doctrine; personal costs order against office‑bearers.
|
6 February 2026 |
|
Compensation Fund actuarial bases cannot be used to calculate the respondent’s delictual loss of earnings.
Delict — loss of earnings — distinction between COIDA compensation and delictual damages — Compensation Fund actuarial bases not to determine third‑party delictual liability — courts must scrutinise expert evidence even if uncontradicted — condonation for late appeal where interests of justice require.
|
6 February 2026 |
|
Applicant failed to prove exceptional circumstances or irreparable harm to enforce spoliation order pending appeal under s18(3).
Spoliation – Enforcement pending appeal – Superior Courts Act s18(1),(3) – Requirement to prove exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm – Irreparable harm assessed factually and may be subsumed into exceptional-circumstances inquiry – Condonation for late affidavit – Costs (scale C, two counsel).
|
6 February 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where expert opinion relied on uncalled investigators and the applicant failed to discharge the onus.
Leave to appeal — Superior Courts Act s17(1)(a)(i) & (ii) — reasonable prospects and compelling reasons — Expert opinion must be founded on established facts — evidence reliance on uncalled insurance investigators — Law of Evidence Amendment Act s3(1) — plaintiff’s onus and absence of medical evidence for claimed amnesia — refusal of leave and costs.
|
6 February 2026 |
| January 2026 |
|
|
A consent order fixing quantum constitutes a judgment debt for PRIA interest; Calderbank offers cannot reopen agreed costs.
Prescribed Rate of Interest Act s 2A(3) — agreement fixing future-loss quantum deemed a judgment debt for interest purposes; Consent orders and res judicata — finality of agreed costs; Calderbank offers cannot reopen settled costs; Condonation — inordinate delay, inadequate explanation, and lack of prospects of success; Costs — party-and-party with two counsel on scale B; State Liability Act does not govern interest on debts.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: ECTA does not preclude Wills Act s2(3) recognition of an electronically stored, electronically signed will.
Wills Act s 2(3) – Electronic signatures and electronic wills – ECTA s 4(3)/s 4(4) and schedules – whether ECTA excludes operation of Wills Act s 2(3) – jurisdictional requirements for s 2(3) (Smith v Parsons; Van der Merwe) – Superior Courts Act s 17(1) leave to appeal ("would" test) – costs on scale B.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Applicant failed to prove undisturbed possession of a private gate for mandament van spolie; application dismissed with costs.
Property law – mandament van spolie – requirements for spoliation (peaceful and undisturbed possession; unlawful deprivation) – quasi-possession of servitude/right of way – spoliation inappropriate to decide contractual disputes – urgency of spoliation applications.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Applicant failed to prove undisturbed possession; mandament van spolie refused and application dismissed with costs.
Property law – Mandament van spolie – requirements of peaceful and undisturbed possession and unlawful deprivation – quasi-possession of servitude/access – distinction between spoliation and enforcement of contractual/servitudal rights – urgency in spoliation proceedings.
|
30 January 2026 |
|
Suspension without complying with Regulation 6’s prior-representation requirement was unlawful; suspension set aside and personal costs ordered.
Principle of legality; Local Government: Disciplinary Regulations for Senior Managers (Regulation 6) – precautionary suspension; automatic lapse after three months; audi alteram partem – requirement for prior written representations; unlawful suspension set aside; personal costs for mala fide conduct.
|
28 January 2026 |
|
Master’s appointment of co‑trustees without consultation was unlawful, irrational and set aside on statutory review.
Trusts — Master’s appointment of co‑trustees under s7(2) — statutory review under s23 of Trust Property Control Act — audi alteram partem and legitimate expectation — PAJA review grounds: ulterior purpose, unauthorised dictates, irrationality — letters of authority set aside.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where the claimed flock was identifiable and no reasonable prospects of success existed.
Superior Courts Act s17(1)(a) — leave to appeal — higher threshold; Identification of property — ear tags sufficient to identify flock; Urgent relief and alternative relief — competent; Commixtio and ownership issues; Business rescue practitioners — no special dispensation; Execution by sheriff — order executable.
|
23 January 2026 |
|
Provincial roads authority liable for failure to repair/warn of road defect; damages apportioned 80% authority, 20% deceased.
Delict — Road-traffic single-vehicle accident — State/Provincial roads authority duty to maintain roads and warn of hazards — Wrongful omission and negligence — Factual and legal causation — Contributory negligence and apportionment of damages — Costs.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
Respondent’s rescission of the applicant’s senior manager appointment upheld for procedural non‑compliance with mandatory screening regulations.
Administrative law; municipal senior manager appointments; interpretation and application of Regulations 14 and 15 (screening and interviews); requirement that written screening report be available prior to interviews; procedural non-compliance renders appointment unlawful; rescission of appointment upheld; urgency of review claims affecting public interest.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
Court varied reinstatement order to include backdated remuneration and interest under Rule 42(1)(b).
Rule 42(1)(b) — variation of orders for ambiguity/omission — reasonable time requirement; interpretation of reinstatement — includes backpay and benefits; peremption not automatically fatal to rescission/variation.
|
16 January 2026 |
|
A peregrinus plaintiff is not automatically required to furnish security for costs; the court exercises discretion based on fairness.
Civil procedure – Security for costs – Rule 47(3) – Peregrinus v incola – no automatic right to security; court exercises discretion based on fairness and particular circumstances – condonation of late affidavit – foreign funds as evidence of means – costs on attorney-and-client scale.
|
9 January 2026 |
| December 2025 |
|
|
Suretyships construed to cover future commission debts; no release absent creditor’s breach; certificate of balance prima facie proof.
Contract — Suretyship — Interpretation of continuing/covering suretyships; broking agreement context; book/portfolio transfer; creditor’s certificate of balance as prima facie proof; prejudice to surety requires breach of legal duty.
|
19 December 2025 |
|
|
12 December 2025 |
|
Caveat subscriptor applies: signatories bound where no misrepresentation by lessor or reasonable unilateral mistake is shown.
Contract law – hire/rental agreements – caveat subscriptor – misrepresentation and unilateral (justus) error – agency and third‑party supplier – exclusion of warranties and cession of claims – certificate of indebtedness as proof of quantum.
|
12 December 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to prove illegal mining or entitlement to supervisory interdict; mining right and environmental authorisation existed.
Urgent application; supervisory/structural interdict; final vs interim interdict; requirements for interdict; mining right and land-use zoning; environmental authorisation and EIA/EMPr; Water Use Licence (NWA s21) and Waste Management Licence (NEMWA s19–20); Plascon‑Evans principle; self‑created urgency.
|
5 December 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where appeal lacked prospects, raised new issues in reply and was rendered moot.
Civil procedure – Leave to appeal (s 17 Superior Courts Act) – reasonable prospects or compelling reasons required – mootness and practical effect (s 16(2)(a)(i)) – new issues raised in reply impermissible – declaratory relief discretionary.
|
5 December 2025 |
|
Whether leave to appeal under s17 should be granted where applicant challenges factual findings and expert evidence in collision case.
Application for leave to appeal — Superior Courts Act s17(1)(a)(i)&(ii) — whether appeal has reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons to be heard — factual and credibility findings in collision case — duty and risk of right-turn manoeuvre (Bata Shoe) — negative inference for failure to call available witnesses — weight of reconstruction expert evidence versus eyewitness testimony (Lloyds).
|
5 December 2025 |
| November 2025 |
|
|
Public Protector’s findings against municipal office-bearers set aside for irrationality and failure to consider material evidence.
Public Protector — review of report — failure to consider independent investigatory report — irrational findings — maladministration and fruitless and wasteful expenditure — travel and subsistence policy — duty to investigate and evaluate evidence.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Contingency deductions and actuarial capping determine final loss-of-earnings after a motor accident causing unemployability.
Motor-vehicle accident — Quantum — Past and future loss of earnings — Acceptance of joint expert minute — Actuarial contingencies and statutory capping — Costs (Scale B) — Section 17(4)(a) RAF undertaking — Contingency Fees Act compliance.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Spoliation succeeds where a school’s quasi‑possession of a gymnasium was unlawfully disturbed; restoration ordered with costs.
Property law — Mandament van spolie — quasi‑possession/incorporeal right of use — restoration of unlawful dispossession of gymnasium — strike‑out application refused.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Schedule 5 accused granted bail where magistrate misdirected by failing to weigh evidence and consider enforceable bail conditions.
Criminal law — Bail on appeal — CPA s65 appeal standard; Schedule 5 offences — s60(11)(b) onus on accused to show interests of justice; s60(4)–(9) factors; requirement to make probabilistic findings; misdirection where court fails to analyse evidence or consider effective bail conditions; granting bail with stringent conditions.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Life sentence set aside as startlingly disproportionate; substituted with 23 years’ imprisonment.
Criminal law – Sentencing – s 51(2) CLAA discretionary minimums – court may exceed prescribed minimum but must proportionally and properly motivate sentence; appellate interference where material misdirection or sentence startlingly disproportionate. Sentencing triad, prior convictions and trust relationship as aggravation.
|
28 November 2025 |
|
Applicant charged with Schedule 6 offences failed to prove exceptional circumstances or present genuinely new facts to obtain bail.
Criminal procedure — Bail under section 60(11)(a) CPA — Schedule 6 offences — heightened onus to show exceptional circumstances and interests of justice; New-facts bail application — facts must be genuinely new, not a reshuffling of previously available evidence; Non-disclosure of residence and association with co-accused undermines credibility and renewed bail attempt.
|
21 November 2025 |
|
Appellate court set aside bail refusal where magistrate failed to analyze evidence and consider suitable bail conditions.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Schedule 6 offences – s60(11) places onus on accused to prove exceptional circumstances on balance of probabilities. Appellate review – s65(4) – appeal court to set aside only if lower court was wrong and to give the decision it considers appropriate after fresh consideration. Bail considerations – strength of the State’s case not determinative; court must make findings on probabilities of risks in s60(4) and consider suitable bail conditions. Failure to give adequate reasons and to analyse evidence amounts to misdirection and wrongful exercise of discretion.
|
21 November 2025 |
|
Applicant failed to show reasonable apprehension of bias from trial delays; refusal to recuse was not irregular.
• Criminal procedure – recusal – test for apprehension of bias: objective SARFU standard and onus on applicant.• Delay in trials – s 342A inquiries – causation and evidentiary basis for findings; systemic delays not necessarily attributable to presiding officer.• Judicial conduct – presumption of impartiality; reluctance to recuse absent cogent evidence to avoid abuse of limited judicial resources.
|
19 November 2025 |
|
Rescission and condonation refused where applicant elected not to oppose final sequestration and gave inadequate explanation.
Insolvency — rescission of final sequestration — Rule 42(1)(a) — elected absence not a ground for rescission; condonation requires full explanation and prospects of success; postponement discretionary and may be refused for tactical delay.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Appeal dismissed: single-witness evidence upheld, self-defence rejected, 12-year sentence affirmed.
Criminal law – murder – single-witness evidence and cautionary rule; contradictions – materiality and corroboration; self-defence – necessity, proportionality and imminence of attack; dolus eventualis; sentence – minimum prescribed sentence and appellate interference.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused: interim interdict not appealable; no prospects or compelling reasons; new grounds impermissible.
Appealability — interim interdict — Zweni criteria: final in effect; definitive of rights; disposes of substantial relief — Superior Courts Act s 17(1) leave test (reasonable prospects or compelling reasons) — interests of justice and irreparable harm — doctrine of finality — impermissibility of raising new grounds on leave application; conflicting judgment distinguishable.
|
14 November 2025 |
|
Warrantless-search evidence admissible; circumstantial evidence sufficed for murder; no duplication; life sentences upheld.
Criminal law – admissibility of warrantless search and seizure (consent and exclusionary principles); circumstantial evidence – application of R v Blom and S v Reddy tests; duplication of convictions – murder versus defeating course of justice; minimum sentences – substantial and compelling circumstances under s 51 Criminal Law Amendment Act.
|
7 November 2025 |
|
A sole director without registered shareholding or mandate unlawfully transferred company funds; rule nisi confirmed.
Companies law; corporate authority and bank mandates – whether a sole director had authority to transact; alleged share sale and registration – effect of absent company/CIPC records; fiduciary duties and s75(3) Companies Act – related‑party transactions require shareholder approval; interim restitutionary relief (rule nisi) confirmed; costs limited to party-and-party.
|
7 November 2025 |
| October 2025 |
|
|
Leave to appeal denied: no reasonable prospects or compelling reasons; contractor’s payment‑complaint and termination arguments fail.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal – section 17(1)(a) Superior Courts Act – test: reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons. Construction law – JBCC contract – employer’s alleged late/non‑payment; reciprocity and enforcement of penalty clauses; termination and repudiation. Judicial duty of consideration – application of Vodacom v Makate; holistic assessment of reasons.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Article VII(5) of CITES is part of South African law; MEC’s refusal to apply it was unlawful and set aside.
• Environmental/CITES – International treaty incorporation – Whether Article VII(5) CITES incorporated into domestic law via NEMBA and practice.• Administrative law – PAJA/principle of legality – Decision to refuse CITES-related export permits reviewable where relevant exemptions ignored.• CITES technicalities – Source codes (especially ‘C’) and their domestic significance; import permit requirement displaced by Article VII(5) certificate.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where applicant sought final interdict without instituting action and had no reasonable prospects of success.
Interdicts – interim versus final interdict – rule nisi – requirement to establish clear right for final interdict; Leave to appeal – s 17(1)(a)(i) Superior Courts Act – reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons; Urgent relief – necessity of instituting action proceedings to determine rights when seeking final relief.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Court dismissed application to stay business rescue and interdict sale, finding lack of standing and no prima facie case.
Companies Act (Business Rescue) – s 133 moratorium on legal proceedings – leave required where proceedings relate to company property; shareholders' rights during business rescue (s 146). Locus standi – tenant/creditor and minority shareholder standing during business rescue; derivative actions (s 165) and oppressive conduct relief (s 163). Intervention – requirements for joinder by a party with direct and substantial interest. Interim relief – requirements for urgency, prima facie case, irreparable harm and balance of convenience in stay/interdict applications during business rescue. Security and cession disputes – effect of alleged invalid cession on creditor rights and business rescue process.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Unlawful unilateral cancellation of bail and appearance of bias rendered the trial unfair; conviction and sentence set aside.
Criminal procedure – s 299A – rights of complainant to participate in parole proceedings – properly invoked by sentencing court when direct imprisonment is imposed. Criminal procedure – s 68 – cancellation of bail – prosecution application and evidence under oath required; unilateral cancellation irregular and unlawful. Fair trial – reasonable apprehension of bias – conduct of presiding officer and denial of audi alteram partem vitiated trial. Remedy – conviction and sentence set aside for failure of justice; referral to DPP for re‑arraignment; retrial before different magistrate.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Appellate court upheld life sentence for rape of an eight‑year‑old, finding no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate.
Criminal law – Minimum sentence (s 51(1) CLAA) – Rape of a child under 18 – Whether substantial and compelling circumstances justify departure from life sentence. Sentencing – Discretion of trial court – appellate interference only for misdirection, irregularity, grave error or shockingly inappropriate sentence. Factors – aggravating: victim’s young age, position of trust, HIV status, prior sexual convictions, lack of remorse, psychological harm to child. Mitigation – guilty plea, health, age, pre‑trial custody, rehabilitation participation – insufficient to outweigh aggravation.
|
31 October 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where applicants failed to show reasonable prospects or contempt beyond reasonable doubt.
Application for leave to appeal — Superior Courts Act s 17(1)(a)(i) — test: reasonable prospects of success or compelling reasons; contempt of court — requirement to prove wilfulness and mala fides beyond reasonable doubt; Plascon-Evans principle — effect of annexures not before court; Superior Courts Act s 18(1) — suspension of execution pending appeal.
|
17 October 2025 |
|
Business rescue in another division does not suspend liquidation if the company’s registered office and business are in this division.
Companies Act – s131(6) moratorium – effect of business rescue application on pending liquidation; Jurisdiction – registered office/principal place of business determines forum for business rescue and liquidation; Abuse of process – launching business rescue in another division to delay liquidation; Winding‑up – creditor’s strong entitlement and narrow judicial discretion to refuse.
|
3 October 2025 |
| September 2025 |
|
|
Business rescue denied for lack of reasonable prospects and bona fides; final liquidation granted and costs awarded.
Companies Act — business rescue (s131(4)) — requirement of financial distress and reasonable prospects of rescue; need for coherent factual and financial foundation for rescue plan. Business rescue — bona fides — late and speculative applications subject to close scrutiny; prolonged provisional liquidation undermines rescue prospects. Evidence — ss 417/418 enquiry material — inadmissible without proper application and opportunity to respond; struck out. Insolvency/liquidation — Badenhorst rule — bona fide dispute of debt must be timely and genuine; failure to seek rescission of default judgment undermines bona fides. Costs — costs follow result; intervening employees to pay wasted costs for late intervention.
|
26 September 2025 |
|
Medical-negligence particulars must plead specific material facts and causal links with sufficient particularity under Rule 18(4).
Pleadings – Rule 18(4) U. Rules of Court – Every pleading must state material facts clearly and with sufficient particularity; Irregular step – Rule 30(1)/18(12) – non-compliance with pleading rules; Medical negligence – greater particularity required in pleadings; Distinction facta probanda v facta probantia – primary facts to be pleaded vs evidential particulars; Amendment – court may order amendment rather than setting aside; Costs – costs in the cause.
|
26 September 2025 |