|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 2025 |
|
|
Plea struck out as vague, internally inconsistent and incapable of disclosing a defence; exception upheld and costs awarded.
Civil procedure – Exception – Rule 23(1) – Pleading vague and embarrassing – Internal contradictions (acceptance of credit, delivery, indebtedness, cession, acknowledgement of debt) – National Credit Act inapplicable to juristic person – Plea struck out – Costs on scale B.
|
3 February 2025 |
|
Petition against a 15-year minimum sentence dismissed for lack of compelling and substantial circumstances; registrar delay condemned.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum sentences – robbery with aggravating circumstances – requirement of compelling and substantial circumstances to deviate from prescribed minimum. Criminal procedure – Petition against sentence – prospects of success on appeal where previous convictions established. Court administration – Registrar’s office misclassification and delay – administrative inefficiency warranting referral for action.
|
3 February 2025 |
|
Leave to appeal sentence dismissed for lack of prospects given petitioners' significant prior convictions; Registrar's inefficiency criticised.
Criminal law – Petition for leave to appeal sentence – Assessment of prospects of success in light of prior convictions – Administrative law – Registrar's office inefficiency and remedial recommendations.
|
3 February 2025 |
| January 2025 |
|
|
Unlawful 24-day detention in degrading conditions warranted R480,000 damages; defendant conceded liability; costs on Scale B.
Delict — unlawful arrest and detention — assessment of quantum — duration, conditions, invasion of dignity and other relevant factors. Evidence — consent to filing damages affidavit precluding cross-examination — affidavit evidence uncontested. Constitutional rights — deprivation of liberty and dignity. Costs — late concession by State — Scale B.
|
31 January 2025 |
|
Court refused to admit expert evidence on affidavit under Rule 38(2) where respondent reasonably required cross-examination.
Rule 38(2) – evidence on affidavit in action trials; discretion constrained by proviso protecting right to cross-examination; balancing fairness and cost/time-saving; expert evidence – oral evidence preferred where opposing party reasonably requires cross-examination.
|
29 January 2025 |
|
Applicant granted leave to amend plea to clarify second respondent’s employment; applicant ordered to pay amendment costs.
Civil procedure – Amendment of pleadings – Rule 28(4) and (10) – Leave to amend to clarify employment/secondment status permitted to facilitate proper ventilation of dispute. Civil procedure – Irregular proceedings – Rule 30 – Late objection to supplementary affidavit inappropriate; timely Rule 30 process required. Costs – Applicant seeking indulgence ordered to pay costs including wasted costs where amendment application prosecuted haphazardly.
|
29 January 2025 |
|
Late appeal condoned; convictions and mandatory life sentences for rape upheld; no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate.
Criminal law – Rape – single-witness identification and corroboration; Theft of motor vehicle – fingerprint evidence; Minimum sentences – section 51(1) Criminal Law Amendment Act – substantial and compelling circumstances required to deviate; Appellate review – deference to trial court credibility findings absent misdirection or shockingly inappropriate sentence.
|
28 January 2025 |
|
Late appeal condoned; 25-year sentence for rape upheld as not resulting from material misdirection or shockingly inappropriate.
Criminal law – prescribed minimum sentences – s 51(1) Criminal Law Amendment Act – life sentence mandatory unless substantial and compelling circumstances exist. Sentencing – substantial and compelling circumstances – nature and cumulative effect of mitigating and aggravating factors; alcohol not necessarily mitigating. Appeal – appellate interference in sentence – only for material misdirection or where imposed sentence is shockingly inappropriate (S v Malgas). Rape – differentiation between degrees of seriousness; not every s 51(1) case mandates life imprisonment.
|
28 January 2025 |
|
A provisional sequestration founded on an existing, unsuspended default judgment may be finally confirmed despite speculative, unfiled rescission plans.
Insolvency – Sequestration – Confirmation of provisional sequestration where based on a binding default judgment and no rescission pending. Civil procedure – Effect of default judgment – Judgment binds and is enforceable until set aside (s 165(5) Constitution; Tasima). Locus standi – Cession and power of attorney establish creditor’s locus standi; earlier determinations may preclude relitigation absent a live rescission. Abuse of process/delay – Intended but uninstituted rescission applications do not warrant discharge of provisional sequestration. Compliance – Advertisement and service requirements for final sequestration.
|
24 January 2025 |
|
Court confirms 1992 tribal resolution and interdicts respondents from allocating or occupying the applicants’ allocated business site.
Property/Customary law – authenticity of tribal resolution – authority of senior traditional council (kgotlakgolo) to allocate business sites – validity of customary allocation and internal transfer – interdict to prevent allocation/occupation – referral for oral evidence (Rule 6(5)(g)) and application of credibility/reliability/probabilities (Plascon-Evans/Stellenbosch approach).
|
24 January 2025 |
|
Unilateral removal of an urgent application equates to withdrawal requiring consent or leave; respondent ordered to pay taxed attorney and client costs.
Civil procedure – urgent applications (Rule 6(12)) – removal from roll – removal equated with withdrawal – Rule 41 requires consent or leave – costs consequences – unilateral removal without tendering costs attracts adverse costs (attorney and client).
|
24 January 2025 |
|
Section 309C petition dismissed for lack of prospects; Registrar’s misconduct and supervisory failures referred for investigation.
Criminal procedure — s309C petition against sentence — administrative delay and misallocation of petition files by Registrar — late transmission by clerk of court — denial of effective exercise of petition rights — SOP and Batho Pele principles — prima facie misconduct and referral for investigation.
|
23 January 2025 |
|
Petition against sentence dismissed for lack of prospects; Registrar’s prolonged administrative failures referred for investigation.
Criminal procedure – petition under s309C CPA – late transmission and prolonged non-processing of petition; administrative mismanagement and misallocation of case numbers by Registrar; failure to charge or explain s51 Criminal Law Amendment Act affecting sentencing exposure; referral of Registrar and supervisory officials for investigation for dereliction of duty.
|
23 January 2025 |
|
Arrest was unlawful for lack of reasonable suspicion and inadequate investigation; plaintiff awarded R40,000 plus costs.
Criminal procedure – warrantless arrest – section 40(1)(b) CPA – reasonable suspicion must exist at time of arrest; ex post facto justifications impermissible. Police conduct – duty to investigate and assess exculpatory statements before forming suspicion. Delict – unlawful arrest and detention – assessment of solatium considering duration, conditions and constitutional right to freedom. Costs – litigant justified in approaching High Court notwithstanding magistrate jurisdiction where constitutional liberty is at stake.
|
15 January 2025 |
|
State failed to prove reasonable grounds for arrest; unlawful arrest and 23-day detention awarded R350,000 damages.
Police law – arrest without warrant under s 40(1)(g) CPA and Stock Theft Act – onus on state to justify lawfulness; failure to call material witnesses undermines state case; inadequate investigation and lack of reasonable grounds render arrest and consequent detention unlawful; entitlement to damages for 23 days’ unlawful detention; interest and costs awarded.
|
15 January 2025 |
|
Respondent’s non‑performance repudiated the contract; applicant entitled to deposit refund, but not consequential or speculative profit losses.
Contract law – repudiation and rescission – supplier’s failure to manufacture, deliver and install goods – refund of deposit; Damages – causation and quantification of consequential loss – substitution purchase not proven equivalent; Lost profits – requirement of reasonable certainty and causal link; Costs – successful claim for refund awarded party-and-party costs.
|
14 January 2025 |
|
Court awarded R100,000 general damages for PTSD and loss of amenities after unlawful rubber-bullet shooting by police.
Delict — Unlawful use of rubber bullets by police — assessment of general damages for pain, disfigurement, PTSD and loss of amenities; expert psychiatric and psychological evidence admitted by agreement; comparative awards as guidance only; interest from date of summons; costs on High Court Scale B.
|
10 January 2025 |
|
Alleged sodomisation unpleaded and inadmissible; R90,000 awarded for three-day unlawful arrest and detention.
Unlawful arrest and detention – liability conceded; assessment focused on quantum. Pleadings – facta probanda required; unpleaded, serious allegations inadmissible to enhance quantum. Proof of patrimonial loss – must be pleaded and causally linked to detention. Quantum – factors include duration, conditions, invasions of dignity, comparable awards; appellate court may interfere where trial award is inadequate. Costs – successful appellant awarded costs, including appeal costs.
|
9 January 2025 |
|
Minor awarded R3,366,204.60 for loss of earning capacity after 40% contingency reduction.
• Road Accident Fund — quantum — loss of earning capacity of minor — expert evidence (neurosurgical, clinical, educational, occupational and industrial psychological assessments) and actuarial valuation.
• Contingency deductions — appropriate allowance for speculation in assessing a minor’s pre- and post-accident earning prospects.
• RAF Regulations — determination of whether injury is ‘serious’ falls to the Fund, not the trial court in quantum proceedings.
• Award of costs — defendant ordered to pay taxed or agreed party-and-party costs (Scale B including counsel).
|
6 January 2025 |
|
A default declaratory order was rescinded where the Master showed an arguable defence despite an administrative default.
• Civil procedure – rescission of default judgment – Uniform Rule 42(1)(a) and common law rescission; requirements: reasonable explanation and bona fide defence with prospects of success.
• Doctrine of peremption – acquiescence in judgment; objective conduct enquiry.
• Insolvency law – interpretation of s349 read with s351(1) of Companies Act and s153 read with Third Schedule of Insolvency Act regarding Master’s fees under R5,000.
|
6 January 2025 |
|
Reported
Evicting and demolishing occupied dwellings without a court order breaches section 26(3) and PIE; prior interdict not perpetual.
Property law/evictions – Eviction and demolition of dwellings without a valid court order unlawful; s 26(3) Constitution and PIE apply; prior interdicts not perpetual. Civil procedure – Application of Plascon-Evans where respondent’s denials are unsubstantiated; applicants’ version of occupation accepted. Public law/municipal conduct – Municipality must use PIE procedures and may not rely on outdated interdict to engage in self-help. Remedies – Mandatory restoration of possession, reconstruction or alternative accommodation, return of belongings, and interdict against further evictions without court order.
|
6 January 2025 |
|
Caveat subscriptor defeats a signatory’s defence of not reading a contract absent duress or material misrepresentation.
Civil procedure – summary judgment – bona fide defence – signing and conduct (payments) as evidence of assent. Contract law – caveat subscriptor – signatory bound by written agreement absent duress or material misrepresentation. Instalment sale agreements – cancellation and repossession – absence of a pleaded and substantiated defence on papers defeats summary judgment.
|
6 January 2025 |
|
Reported
Adjectus defence must be pleaded; set-off and payments were proved and the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – duty to begin – Uniform Rule 39(11). Set-off – requisites for valid set-off and proof on balance of probabilities; delivery/registration as relevant to when purchase price becomes due. Performance – adjectus solutionis gratia v adstipulator; need to plead defence and legal effect of nominating third parties for payment. Tender/offer to settle – effect of court’s failure to record tender; Uniform Rule 34.
|
6 January 2025 |
| December 2024 |
|
|
Appellate court upheld trial court’s deviation from prescribed life sentences; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Criminal law – sentencing – prescribed minimum sentences (s51 Criminal Law Amendment Act) – substantial and compelling circumstances – appellate interference only where sentencing discretion misdirected, disproportionate or vitiated; concurrency of sentences – link between offences; condonation of late appeal.
|
31 December 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal granted against interpretation that Rule 6(5)(b)(iii)(aa) prevents summary-judgment filings between 21 Dec and 7 Jan.
Civil procedure — Uniform Rules of Court — interpretation of Rule 6(5)(b)(iii)(aa) (dies non: 21 December–7 January) — whether exclusion applies to founding affidavits in summary-judgment applications; interplay between Rule 6 and Rule 32 (summary judgment); Rule 30 irregular-step challenge; appealability of interlocutory refusals of summary judgment — leave to appeal granted.
|
31 December 2024 |
|
Applicant slipped on unmarked, incomplete tiling; respondents liable for damages and costs.
Delict — occupier/owner duty to keep premises safe and to warn of defects; proof of warnings/indemnity notices; assessment of credibility and probabilities; causation (but‑for and legal causation); contributory negligence considered and rejected.
|
31 December 2024 |
|
Appeal against life sentence for multi‑person rape and attempted murder dismissed; no substantial and compelling circumstances to depart.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Minimum sentences – Section 51(1)(ii) CLAA – Life imprisonment where rape committed by more than one person; substantial and compelling circumstances required to deviate. Criminal law – Rape – aggravating factors: home invasion, firearm threat, presence of infant, refusal to use protection. Criminal law – Multiple convictions – duplication and concurrency – aggregate sentence not unduly severe where effective sentence is life and terms run concurrently.
|
20 December 2024 |
|
Administrative mismanagement of petitions led to referrals for investigation; one sentence set aside for lack of reasons beyond mandatory minimum.
• Criminal procedure – s309C petitions – administrative delay and misregistration of petitions – impact on petitioners’ rights.
• Sentencing – s51(2) minimum sentences – departure from prescribed minimum requires reasons; failure to give reasons is misdirection.
• Court administration – duties of Registrar and clerks – dereliction of duty, potential misconduct and criminality.
• Remedies – dismissal or granting of petitions on merits notwithstanding administrative failures; referrals for investigation and steps to facilitate appeals/prosecutions.
|
19 December 2024 |
|
Appeal upheld in part: duplicative rape counts quashed; two convictions for repeated rape with grievous bodily harm confirmed and life sentences upheld.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Duplication of convictions – multiple acts of penetration in single encounter should ordinarily be charged as one count per victim to avoid impermissible splitting of charges. Criminal law – Evidence – Consent defence rejected where overwhelming corroborative evidence (victim accounts and medico-legal reports) establish forced repeated penetration and injuries. Sentencing – Prescribed minimum life imprisonment under section 51(1) and Part I of Schedule 2 – no substantial and compelling circumstances found to deviate.
|
19 December 2024 |
|
Lay representation and improperly commissioned affidavits defeated standing and doomed the application.
Practice and procedure — Urgent application — founding affidavit must be properly commissioned (Regulation 4) — affidavits must contain locus standi, jurisdiction and cause of action — companies/NPCs require authorization and must be represented by an attorney or advocate — failure to plead essential factual basis fatal.
|
4 December 2024 |
|
Corporate applicants must litigate through legal practitioners; defective affidavits and lack of authorization justify dismissal.
Urgent application — representation of corporate applicants — an artificial person must litigate through an attorney or advocate; unauthorised natural person cannot represent company/NPC. Founding affidavit defects — non-compliance with Regulation 4(1) and 4(2) (commissioner of oaths formalities) and absence of condonation. Requirements for applications — necessity to plead locus standi, cause of action, jurisdiction and evidentiary material; failure to link papers to interdictal relief. Costs — discretion where respondents served notices but did not participate.
|
4 December 2024 |
|
Application dismissed for lack of authority, improperly commissioned affidavits, absence of locus standi, and no urgency.
Administrative law – urgent interdict and disclosure – requirements for founding affidavit and locus standi; Commissioning of affidavits – Regulation 4(1) compliance; Representation of artificial persons – must be by an admitted attorney or advocate; Urgency – need for explanation for late institution; Competency of relief – connection between documents sought and interdict.
|
3 December 2024 |
|
An urgent interdict failed because the founding affidavit was defective and companies were not lawfully represented, warranting dismissal and punitive costs.
• Civil procedure – founding affidavit – non-compliance with Regulation 4(1) invalidates affidavit.• Corporate representation – artificial persons must be represented by an attorney or advocate; lay representation not permitted.• Locus standi and cause of action – founding affidavit must allege and prove direct, current interest and a legal basis for relief.• Urgent applications – urgency must be genuine; relaunching identical matters may constitute abuse of process.• Costs – punitive attorney-and-client costs including senior counsel for abusing court process.
|
2 December 2024 |
|
Urgent interdict dismissed: applicant lacked standing, proper authorization and a validly commissioned affidavit; costs awarded.
Administrative law; urgent interdict to restrain municipal Executive Council meetings—requirements of locus standi and cause of action; proper commissioning of affidavits (Regulation 4); representation of artificial persons (resolution and legal practitioner requirement); Promotion of Access to Information Act as appropriate remedy; costs order against lay applicant.
|
2 December 2024 |
| November 2024 |
|
|
Rule 43 order cannot be altered without new circumstances; applicant's request dismissed.
Family law - urgent application - Rule 43(6) - Material change in circumstances - Appealability of Rule 43 orders.
|
28 November 2024 |
|
Sale in execution set aside where attorney-purchaser bought property for a grossly inadequate price, despite procedural compliance.
Execution sales – fairness requirement; sale must aim to realise best price. Conflict of interest/self-dealing – purchaser was respondent’s attorney under power of attorney. Procedural compliance (advertising/service) does not cure an unfair, grossly inadequate auction sale. Interdict against transfer and Registrar of Deeds permitted to protect execution debtor’s interest.
|
26 November 2024 |
|
An appeal court will not disturb a trial court’s sentence absent misdirection; ten‑year sentence for attempted murder confirmed.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Appeal against sentence – Appellate interference limited to cases of misdirection or striking disproportion; trial court’s balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors upheld; prior convictions and gang membership relevant to sentence. Criminal law – Attempted murder – deliberate stabbing in custody – seriousness of offence warrants custodial sentence. Firearms Control Act – declaration of unfitness to possess firearms not appealable in absence of separate ground.
|
26 November 2024 |
|
Appeal dismissed: single eyewitness found credible, common purpose established, and sentences upheld.
Criminal law – single-witness evidence – caution and credibility; gang-related violence – identification and corroboration; common purpose doctrine – active association liability; sentencing – pre-trial custody and prescribed minimum sentences; appellate restraint on sentence interference.
|
22 November 2024 |
|
A pending related action does not automatically justify postponing an eviction absent demonstrable prospects of success.
Eviction — postponement and stay — applicant must show cogent grounds and prospects of success; pending related action does not automatically bar eviction proceedings; disputed factual issues must be ventilated in eviction hearing; concurrent hearing of eviction and strike-out applications may be ordered; costs to follow result (party-and-party Scale B).
|
20 November 2024 |
|
A criminal review setting aside conviction for procedural irregularity does not estop defendants from contesting a subsequent civil claim for unlawful detention.
Civil procedure – res judicata / issue estoppel – requirements (idem actor, idem reus, eadem res, eadem causa petendi) – relaxation of requirements only in appropriate cases; Review of criminal conviction – order setting aside conviction for procedural irregularity does not determine civil liability for unlawful detention; Delict – unlawful detention claim requires plaintiff to prove elements of wrongfulness/negligence despite prior review order.
|
20 November 2024 |
|
Court condoned late notice to amend, reinstated claim and granted leave to amend; costs awarded to applicant on Scale B.
Civil procedure – condonation for non‑compliance with court‑ordered amendment period; leave to amend particulars of claim; pleading/exception conceded by applicant; adequacy of explanation for delay (mis‑forwarded email); discretion as to costs (applicant for indulgence bears wasted costs).
|
14 November 2024 |
|
A convicted appellant failed to prove exceptional circumstances for bail pending appeal under section 60(11)(a).
Criminal procedure – Bail pending appeal – Schedule 6 offence – Onus on convicted appellant to prove exceptional circumstances under s60(11)(a); prospects of success/leave to appeal not determinative; State’s non-opposition does not absolve appellant’s onus; appellate interference only if lower court misdirected.
|
14 November 2024 |
|
Plaintiffs awarded R400,000 each for unlawful arrest and detention, plus R10,000 special damages and costs Scale B.
Constitutional and delictual law – unlawful arrest and detention – assessment of quantum for solatium; factors: circumstances of arrest, police conduct, detention conditions, stigma and personal consequences. Interest on unliquidated awards – court discretion as to commencement date and rate. Costs – successful plaintiffs entitled to party-and-party costs (Scale B). Procedural – separation of merits and quantum by agreement; defendant closed case without witnesses.
|
14 November 2024 |
|
Confirmed urgent access order did not constitute an eviction; occupant may remain pending separate eviction proceedings.
Property law – urgent ex parte access orders – distinction between access/interdict and eviction – PIE not engaged where occupant permitted to remain pending eviction proceedings; Sale in liquidation – purchaser in auction acquires ownership absent set-aside of sale; Appealability – confirmed urgent order not final eviction and thus no infringement of PIE requirements at this stage.
|
13 November 2024 |
|
Actuarial, evidence‑based assessment awarded substantial loss of earnings; RAF ordered to pay and provide s17(4)(a) undertaking.
Road Accident Fund – assessment of loss of earnings – admissibility of expert reports on affidavit (Rule 38(2)) – actuarial approach preferred where career and income data available – contingencies to reflect impaired employment prospects – section 17(4)(a) undertaking for future medical expenses.
|
13 November 2024 |
|
Municipality must notify all affected consumers before disconnecting services; failure to do so justified an interim interdict and costs.
Municipal law – pre-termination notice – consumers (including tenants) – procedural fairness under s33 Constitution and PAJA – application of Joseph – interim interdict against disconnection – municipal by-laws and Credit Control Policy compliance.
|
11 November 2024 |
|
Condonation for late rescission refused; no bona fide defence — application dismissed with attorney-and-client costs.
Civil procedure — Rescission of default judgment — Condonation for late filing — Applicant must give full, reasonable explanation covering whole period of delay — Prospects of success require disclosure of bona fide, sustainable defence — Failure to prosecute and vague averments justify dismissal — Costs on attorney-and-client scale where application is tactical and mala fide.
|
10 November 2024 |
|
Appellate court increased solatium to R30,000 after finding magistrate misdirected in assessing unlawful arrest, detention and assault.
Unlawful arrest and detention — assessment of solatium — appellate interference where trial court misdirected — factors in quantum (circumstances of arrest, motive, conduct, duration, injury, status, medical evidence, comparable awards) — costs on High Court scale for deprivation of liberty cases.
|
6 November 2024 |
|
The applicant's appeal lapsed for failure to re‑enrol within ten days after striking‑off under Rule 67(5A)(a)(ii).
Criminal appeals — Magistrates' Court Rules Rule 67(5A)(a)(ii) — striking‑off and mandatory re‑enrolment within 10 days — failure to re‑enrol causes appeal to lapse — subsequent dates/orders cannot revive appeal — reinstatement requires substantive application and condonation; duties of legal representatives under s309 CPA and Uniform Rule 51.
|
5 November 2024 |
|
Condonation for late appeal filing denied where explanation was inadequate, delay excessive, and prospects of success unaddressed.
Condonation – late filing of notice of appeal – sufficiency of explanation and prospects of success – application of Melane factors – requirement for full explanation per Grootboom – impact of prior non‑compliance and lapse of appeal.
|
5 November 2024 |