High Court of South Africa North-West, Mafikeng

The Judges currently  serving on duty at the North West High Court are:

  1. Hon. Judge President RD Hendricks
  2. Hon. Deputy Judge President Djaje
  3. Hon. Judge Petersen
  4. Hon. Judge Reid
  5. Hon. Judge Mfenyana
  6. Hon. Judge Reddy
12 judgments
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Outcomes
  • Case actions
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
12 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
April 2025
Summary judgment granted for recovery on an overdraft facility; defendants’ jurisdictional and technical objections rejected and no bona fide defence found.
Summary judgment – Overdraft facility – Suretyship – Authority to depose to affidavit – Commissioning of affidavits – Rule 32 of Uniform Rules – High Court jurisdiction concurrent with Magistrates’ Court – Sufficiency of defendant’s bona fide defence
29 April 2025
Court confirms jurisdiction and grants default judgment for contract termination and damages due to non-compliance.
Civil procedure – jurisdiction – conclusion of contract within territorial jurisdiction – section 129 notice under National Credit Act – default judgment granted.
29 April 2025
Court awards damages for minor injured in accident, focusing on general damages and loss of earning capacity.
Road Accident Fund – Damages – Quantum for general damages and loss of earning capacity for a minor passenger injured in an accident.
25 April 2025
Court awards R5,788,983.05 for child's injury with funds managed via a trust.
Personal Injury - Quantum determination - Child passenger injured in motor vehicle accident - Award for general damages and loss of earning capacity - Establishment of trust for compensation management.
25 April 2025
Arrest under s40(1)(b) was lawful; applicant failed to prove alleged assault and unlawful detention.
Criminal procedure – Arrest without warrant – s 40(1)(b) – reasonable suspicion may be based on complainant identification and preliminary investigations. Delict – Assault and detention – onus on applicant to prove assault on a balance of probabilities; medical records and inconsistencies may undermine claim. Constitutional right to freedom and security – once unlawfulness is pleaded, respondent must justify deprivation of liberty.
25 April 2025
The High Court retains concurrent jurisdiction over levy disputes and is not required to refer such matters to the Ombud.
Community Schemes Ombud Service – jurisdiction – High Court retains concurrent jurisdiction to adjudicate levy disputes – no requirement to exhaust Ombud forum before approaching court – exclusive jurisdiction not conferred on Ombud by CSOS Act – doctrine of forum non conveniens not applicable – discretion to refer matter to Ombud depends on case-specific exceptional circumstances.
22 April 2025
Rule 34 offer conceded liability; court awarded R850,000 for unlawful arrest and detention, plus interest and costs.
Unlawful arrest and detention; Rule 34(1)/(5) written offer as concession of merits; assessment of quantum for deprivation of liberty; consideration of detention conditions, trauma and defendants litigation conduct; award of damages, interest and costs.
15 April 2025
Applicant awarded R220,000 for eight days’ unlawful detention in inhumane conditions; interest and costs granted.
Unlawful arrest and detention — assessment of damages — factors: duration, circumstances of arrest, inhumane detention conditions, disability of detainee, solatium and deterrence; interest and costs awarded.
10 April 2025
Plea proceedings set aside due to procedural irregularities in questioning under section 112(1)(b) of the CPA.
Criminal procedure – guilty plea – Section 112(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act – driving under influence – specific charge requirements.
10 April 2025
Reported
Bail refusal based on affidavit technicalities vitiated proceedings and warranted set-aside and remittal.
Bail — Affidavit admissibility under s 60(11)(b) CPA; compliance with Justices of the Peace and Commissioners of Oaths Regulations; substance over form; procedural irregularity in bail hearings; setting aside and remittal for de novo bail application.
9 April 2025
Application for leave to appeal dismissed; arrest lawfulness upheld and 48‑hour detention extension under s35/s50 correctly interpreted.
Criminal procedure – lawfulness of arrest – exercise of police discretion; Constitutional and statutory interpretation – s35(1)(d)(ii) and s50(1)(d) – 48‑hour detention rule and next court day extension; leave to appeal – reasonable prospect of success.
4 April 2025
Applicants failed to establish urgency for environmental interdict; matter struck off and party-and-party costs awarded against applicants.
Urgency — Rule 6(12)(b): applicant must explicitly set out circumstances rendering matter urgent and why ordinary course is inadequate; Interim vs final relief — pleadings must be coherent and specify the case to be met; Judicial intervention in procurement — court should not authorise appointments that bypass section 217 procurement requirements; Costs — party-and-party costs appropriate where urgency and papers are deficient, attorney-and-client costs not warranted.
2 April 2025