|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| August 2024 |
|
|
Leave to appeal refused where prior appellate judgment settled pre‑emption and reciprocity issues; no reasonable prospect of success.
Property law – right of pre‑emption and reciprocity – prior appellate determination of applicability to the same facts. Civil procedure – application for leave to appeal under s17(1)(a) Superior Courts Act – requirement of reasonable prospect of success or compelling reason. Interim interdict – necessity of prima facie right and well‑grounded apprehension of irreparable harm. Costs – successful respondents awarded costs on Scale C including two counsel.
|
28 August 2024 |
|
Accused charged with Schedule 6 offences failed to prove exceptional circumstances; bail refused and appeal dismissed.
Bail — Schedule 6 offences — section 60(11) CPA — onus on accused to show exceptional circumstances allowing bail. Exceptional circumstances — must be unusual or extraordinary; everyday hardships and uncorroborated medical complaints insufficient. Appellate review — section 60(4) — will not interfere with magistrate’s discretion absent misdirection or error. Consideration of strength of State’s case and prior bail history relevant to bail decision.
|
28 August 2024 |
|
Court awards R3.825m for serious orthopaedic injuries, rejects significant head injury and finds residual earning capacity.
Road Accident Fund — Assessment of general damages, past and future loss of earnings and past medical expenses; contributory negligence (80/20) applied; expert evidence — duty of candour and reliance on verified facts; dispute over cognitive/head injury and residual earning capacity; protection of funds (trust) consideration.
|
27 August 2024 |
|
Spoliation order restored farm possession and removed tombstone erected without owner/manager consent; ESTA defence failed.
Property law – Spoliation – mandament van spolie – requirements: prior peaceful possession and wrongful deprivation. ESTA s6(4) – right to visit and maintain family graves – does not validate unlawful dispossession absent proof. Civil procedure – disputed facts in motion proceedings – Plascon‑Evans approach and Rule 6(5)(g) – no referral to oral evidence where no bona fide material dispute established. Consent by caretaker/farm manager – evidentiary burden to prove valid consent to alter or mark graves on private land.
|
27 August 2024 |
|
Appellants failed to prove exceptional circumstances for bail on Schedule 6 charges; magistrate’s refusal upheld.
Criminal procedure – Bail in Schedule 6 cases – accused bears onus to prove exceptional circumstances on a balance of probabilities; court must weigh interests of justice against liberty. Factors: seriousness of offences (robbery with aggravating circumstances, kidnapping), credibility (false addresses), prior convictions, outstanding investigations (DNA, RICA, bank tracing). Appeal on bail decision – appellate court will not set aside magistrate’s refusal unless decision shown to be wrong.
|
26 August 2024 |
|
Appeal succeeds: past caregiving award reinstated and arbitrary deduction from actuarial loss set aside; capital award adjusted and costs granted.
Road Accident Fund – personal injury – past caregiving claims – entitlement where family member provides services in lieu of professional caregiver; actuarial calculation of future loss – unlawful deductions unsupported by evidence; appellate interference for material misdirection; costs including two counsel and curator ad litem.
|
23 August 2024 |
|
Reported
Appeal struck from roll for procedural non-compliance and mootness; no interests of justice to hear the matter.
Civil procedure — Appeals — Rule 49(6)(a), Rule 49(7)(a) and Rule 7(2) — Mandatory filing of power of attorney, security for costs and appeal record — Non-compliance deems appeal to have lapsed. Civil procedure — Appeal reinstatement — Rule 49(6)(b) — Appellant must apply to reinstate lapsed appeal on good cause. Justiciability — Mootness — Appeal dismissed where relief sought would have no practical effect and interests of justice do not require determination.
|
23 August 2024 |
|
Reported
DNA-based convictions set aside for lack of proven chain of custody; single-witness rape conviction and prescribed minimum sentence upheld.
Criminal law – DNA evidence – admissibility and probative value dependent on proven chain of custody and linkage of reference samples to accused.* Criminal law – convictions based solely on DNA – appellate court may set aside where tested reference samples are not proven to relate to accused.* Evidence – single-witness evidence in sexual-offence trials – cautionary rule and corroboration; absent misdirection convictions may stand.* Right to silence – an accused’s election not to testify may leave the prosecution’s unchallenged evidence sufficient to convict.* Sentencing – prescribed minimum sentences for serious sexual offences; departure requires substantial and compelling circumstances.
|
23 August 2024 |
|
Proceedings issued against a deceased, unsubstituted respondent are a nullity; matter struck from roll and costs awarded.
Civil procedure — substitution of deceased party — Rule 15(3) — proceedings issued against person deceased at date of issue are nullity; Rule 6(5)(g) — where disputes of fact cannot be resolved on affidavits the court may dismiss, refer to oral evidence or make other directions; striking from roll as proper remedy; costs follow result.
|
21 August 2024 |
|
Particulars of claim lacking specific invoice amounts and due dates are vague and embarrassing; exception upheld, amendment ordered.
Civil procedure – Exception to particulars of claim – Rule 23 – Pleading vague and embarrassing – Two-fold test: vagueness and prejudice – Necessity for particulars to include specific invoice amounts, due dates and payments – Plaintiff required to amend particulars to disclose calculation of claimed debt.
|
21 August 2024 |
|
Appellate court upheld modest damages for malicious prosecution; appellant failed to prove reputational, business or causal harm.
Malicious prosecution – protection order – assessment of quantum for injuria and inconvenience – requirement of evidence for reputational, business or psychological harm – legal causation for third-party conduct – appellate deference to trial court's damage assessment.
|
15 August 2024 |
|
Rule 35(14)/30A demands do not suspend pleading time; party must plead or apply for an extension; Notice of Bar not irregular.
Civil procedure — Uniform Rules r35(14) and r30A — demand for production of documents does not suspend time to plead absent court order; party faced with demand must either plead or apply for extension to bring compulsion application; irregular-step review of Notice of Bar; discretion as to relief and costs.
|
13 August 2024 |
|
Application concerning alleged breach of restraint of trade and use of confidential information referred to oral evidence due to material disputes of fact.
Civil procedure – Restraint of trade – Use and possession of confidential information by former employees – Material dispute of fact – Referral to oral evidence under Rule 6(5)(g) – Enforcement of confidentiality and restraint of trade clauses – Interim relief and final interdicts.
|
12 August 2024 |
|
Review court set aside an incompetent concurrent-sentence order, corrected the firearm unfitness finding, and emphasised prosecution’s duty to prove prior convictions.
Criminal procedure – Sentencing – Section 280(2) CPA – Court may not order new sentences to run with an existing sentence where previous convictions were not proved; Firearms Control Act s103 – orders must specify subsection relied upon and consider enquiry into fitness to possess firearms; Prosecution duty – obtain and place SAP69/previous conviction records before sentencing; Review – High Court may set aside and correct incompetent sentencing orders on automatic review.
|
12 August 2024 |
|
Prescription began when the respondent knew of defects; statutory warranty did not postpone prescription.
Prescription — commencement under s 12(3) Prescription Act — debt due when creditor has minimum facts to institute action; Housing Consumer Protection Measures Act s 13(2)(b)(i) — statutory warranty to rectify structural defects does not postpone prescription or impose pre‑action conditions under s 16 Prescription Act; interruption of prescription — no undertaking or admission established to interrupt prescription; application of Truter, Mtokonya, Links authorities.
|
8 August 2024 |
|
Late appeal condoned; 10‑year prescribed minimum sentence for rape upheld — personal circumstances not substantial and compelling.
Sentencing — prescribed minimum sentences — rape under s.51(2) CLAA — substantial and compelling circumstances — insertion of finger constitutes rape — appellate interference only for material misdirection or shocking, disproportionate sentence; judicial conduct — inappropriate remarks by magistrate condemned but found not to have vitiated sentence; condonation of late appeal.
|
5 August 2024 |
|
Life sentence for rape of a 15‑year‑old upheld; no compelling and substantial circumstances or proven intoxication mitigation.
Criminal law – Minimum sentences – Section 51(1) and Schedule 2 – Rape of person under 16 – Compelling and substantial circumstances required to deviate from prescribed life sentence; Intoxication as potential mitigating factor; Appellate interference with sentence – misdirection or startling inappropriateness required.
|
5 August 2024 |
| July 2024 |
|
|
An incomplete trial record does not defeat a fair appeal if the remaining record is adequate; conviction and sentence confirmed.
Criminal law – Robbery with aggravating circumstances – Identification evidence – Cautionary approach – Trial court’s credibility findings not lightly displaced on appeal. Appeal procedure – Incomplete trial record – Requirement is adequacy for fair consideration, not a perfect transcript (Phakane; S v Chabedi; Schoombee). Sentencing – No material misdirection; appellate interference unwarranted.
|
30 July 2024 |
|
Single-witness rape conviction and prescribed life sentence upheld; contradictions immaterial and no substantial and compelling circumstances found.
Criminal law – Rape – Single-witness evidence and cautionary approach – contradictions immaterial where totality of evidence is credible; Medical J88 evidentiary value – absence of particular injuries not necessarily fatal to complainant’s credibility; Sentence – section 51(1) Act 105/1997 (Schedule 2 Part 1) – no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from life imprisonment.
|
30 July 2024 |
|
Appeal dismissed: identification and DNA corroboration upheld; no substantial and compelling reasons to disturb life sentence.
Criminal law – Rape of a minor – Identification evidence and corroboration – DNA evidence as supportive not conclusive – Appellate deference to trial court credibility findings – Prescribed life sentence: substantial and compelling circumstances required to deviate.
|
30 July 2024 |
|
First-offender status, guilty plea and time in custody did not amount to substantial and compelling circumstances to avoid life imprisonment.
Criminal law – sentencing – prescribed minimum sentences – s 51(1) CLAA – rape committed more than once attracts life imprisonment unless substantial and compelling circumstances exist. Sentencing – personal circumstances (age, first offender, guilty plea, time in custody) – do not invariably amount to substantial and compelling circumstances. Appeal – appellate interference with sentence limited to irregularity, material misdirection, or shockingly disproportionate sentence. Plea of guilty – not per se substantial and compelling mitigation.
|
24 July 2024 |
|
The applicant was unlawfully arrested and detained for several days; awarded R175,000 and costs.
Unlawful arrest and detention; onus on the State to prove lawfulness; s40(1)(b) Criminal Procedure Act; breach of constitutional rights to liberty and fair treatment (s12(1)(a), s35(1)(d)); assessment of solatium for deprivation of liberty; interest from date of judgment; costs awarded.
|
24 July 2024 |
|
Applicant’s challenge to contract termination dismissed for non‑exhaustion; appointment of replacement provider set aside for procedural procurement irregularities.
Administrative law – PAJA s6/s7 – requirement to exhaust internal remedies – termination of SLA; Procurement law – s217 Constitution, SCM/Treasury prescripts – RFQ process, mandatory returnable documents (B‑BBEE, UIF, PSIRA, police clearance) – procedural fairness and transparency; Review – post hoc amendment of procurement documents – set aside of appointment.
|
23 July 2024 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove medical negligence after surgery and specialist scans showed no retained foreign body; claim dismissed with costs.
Medical negligence – standard of care – practitioner required to exercise reasonable skill and care (Van Wyk v Lewis). Causation and onus – plaintiff must prove negligence on a balance of probabilities; res ipsa loquitur not a substitute for proof. Clinical response – tourniquet, immediate surgical exploration and specialist CT venograms and pulmonary angiogram as indicators of appropriate management. Evidence – operation notes and radiology reports negating presence of foreign body dispositive where defendant did not call witnesses.
|
22 July 2024 |
|
Deviation approved by the department did not render contracts void; misrepresentation and breaches not proved; state repudiated contract and plaintiff cancelled it.
Procurement law – s 217 Constitution, PFMA and Treasury regulations – deviation from competitive bidding, recording and reporting obligations; effect of internal departmental non‑reporting on contract validity. Misrepresentation – requirements (false statement, materiality, causation, wrongfulness and negligence) and onus on defendant to prove inducement. Building law – National Building Regulations, SANS 10400 and Agrèment SA certification; rational design obligations and responsibility of principal agent/owner. Interim payment certificates and principal agent conduct as evidence of performance and absence of material breach. Repudiation – unlawful cessation/eviction by employer constitutes repudiation; innocent party may accept and cancel.
|
22 July 2024 |
|
Exceptions dismissed: ambiguous contract wording and absence of MEC Notice did not defeat a disclosed cause of action.
Civil procedure – exception to particulars of claim – pleading must disclose cause of action and not be vague or embarrassing; ambiguous or inelegant contractual wording does not automatically fail; Rule 18(6) requirements for annexing written contracts; quantum sufficiently pleaded by contract term; MFMA s116(3) compliance and MEC Notice matters for trial evidence.
|
22 July 2024 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove negligent delay or causation for post‑operative brain injury; claim dismissed with costs.
Medical negligence – haemothorax management – delay in chest X‑ray/ICD drainage and timing of thoracotomy – causation – expert evidence (Bolam/Bolitho principles) – standard of care for district vs provincial hospitals – ASA3 anaesthetic risk and post‑operative cardiac arrest.
|
22 July 2024 |
|
Court awarded punitive attorney-and-own-client costs against respondents for opposing public-interest water-rights litigation.
• Constitutional law – right of access to sufficient water (s 27) – public-interest litigation to enforce municipal service delivery obligations
• Civil procedure – costs – discretion to award costs in constitutional litigation; protection of bona fide private public-interest litigants
• Costs – punitive order – attorney-and-own-client scale; inclusion of costs for two/three counsel due to complexity and volume
• Conduct of respondent – failure to answer allegations, unnecessary opposition and blame-shifting relevant to costs assessment
|
22 July 2024 |
|
Appellants' challenges to identification and common purpose rejected; convictions for group murder upheld.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — assessment of credibility and contradictions; Criminal law — Section 174 application — discharge at close of State case; Criminal law — Doctrine of common purpose — active association and liability for co-perpetrators; Evidence — Corroboration by postmortem and photographs; Appeal — appellate review of factual findings and credibility.
|
19 July 2024 |
|
Appellant’s convictions upheld; life sentences reduced to 15-year terms under s51(2), yielding an effective 30-year sentence.
Criminal law – conviction – identification evidence and identification parades – reliability assessed by opportunity for observation, modus operandi and identifying mark; Criminal law – DNA evidence – chain of custody and admissibility where report not placed before court; Sentencing – Minimum Sentencing Act (Criminal Law Amendment Act) – distinction between s51(1) (life for Part I Schedule 2) and s51(2) (minimum and maximum for Part III Schedule 2) – Regional Court jurisdiction limited to 15 years for first offenders; Criminal Procedure Act s86 – court’s power to amend charges before judgment and consequences of prosecutor’s failure to amend; Appeal – appellate reluctance to interfere with factual findings absent misdirection; Sentencing adjustment on appeal – substitution of sentence and structuring of concurrency.
|
18 July 2024 |
|
An ex parte urgent order restraining tender adjudication was set aside for material non-disclosure and lack of urgency; punitive costs awarded.
Rule 6(12)(c) – Reconsideration of ex parte urgent orders; Duty of full and frank disclosure in ex parte applications; Urgency and lis pendens in interdicting tender adjudication; Municipal procurement – justiciability; Costs – attorney and client for non-disclosure.
|
17 July 2024 |
|
Reported
Appellate court dismissed sentence appeal; no substantial and compelling circumstances to deviate from mandatory life for multiple rapes.
Criminal law — Rape — Multiple rapes attracting mandatory life sentence under CLAA s51(1) Part 1 — Appellate review of sentence — substantial and compelling circumstances required to deviate from minimum — standards for appellate interference (material misdirection or shocking disparity) — courtroom decorum and judicial language (impact on dignity of complainant and accused) — aggravating factors: premeditation, weapon use, lack of remorse — rehabilitation considerations.
|
15 July 2024 |
|
Unlawful week-long arrest and detention warrants R275,000 damages each, interest and magistrates’ court scale costs.
Unlawful arrest and detention; constitutional right to personal liberty and dignity; quantum of solatium for arbitrary deprivation of liberty; evidence required for additional heads (loss of amenities, psychological harm); social status not determinative; costs on magistrates’ court scale.
|
12 July 2024 |
|
An appeal against a 25-year sentence for sexual intercourse with a 14-year-old was dismissed as appropriate.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Sentence appeal – Sexual intercourse with a 14-year-old – Position of trust and vulnerability as aggravating factors – Appellate interference only if sentence disturbingly inappropriate – Minimum sentence considerations.
|
11 July 2024 |
|
Appeal struck off for failure to timely request reasons and note appeal without condonation; costs awarded against appellant.
Procedure — Appeal — Magistrates' Court Rules rule 51(1) (request for written judgment) and rule 51(3) (noting appeal) — Failure to comply without condonation renders appeal not properly before court — Section 84 Magistrates' Courts Act permits extension of time but requires application and satisfactory explanation — Postponement does not cure procedural non‑compliance — Wasted costs awarded.
|
11 July 2024 |
|
Appeal removed because the trial record was incomplete; appellant ordered to file complete record or explain inability.
Criminal appeal — incomplete trial record — appellant’s entire evidence missing — appellate court cannot determine appeal without complete record — appeal removed from roll — appellant ordered to file complete record or explain inability to do so.
|
11 July 2024 |
|
An unsigned loan agreement attached to particulars does not automatically render the claim excipiable absent a contractual requirement for signature.
Civil procedure — Exception — whether particulars disclose cause of action — unsigned written loan agreement — signature not automatically essential absent contractual precondition — Rule 18(6) compliance — interpretation and factual disputes to be resolved at trial.
|
11 July 2024 |
|
Appeal upheld where trial court misapplied prescribed minimum sentence under section 51(2) CLAA, sentence substituted.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Prescribed minimum sentences – Misapplication of section 51(2) CLAA (first vs second offender) – Material misdirection vitiating sentence – Concurrency discretion – Appeal against sentence.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Convictions and life sentences set aside due to unreliable identification and material contradictions in the complainant’s evidence.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Identity and cautionary rule when relying on single child complainant – Material contradictions and discrepancies – Alibi evidence and corroboration – Prescribed minimum sentence (section 51(1)) not sustainable where conviction unsafe.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Condonation granted but appeal against life sentence for rape of a 7-year-old dismissed; no substantial and compelling circumstances.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Prescribed minimum sentence – Section 51(1) CLAA – Rape of a minor – Substantial and compelling circumstances – Sentencing discretion of trial court – Appellate interference only for misdirection, irregularity or shockingly inappropriate sentence.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Court cannot pre‑emptively interdict the Master from appointing a nominated executor; removal under s54(1)(a)(v) is post‑appointment.
Administration of Estates Act – letters of executorship – Master’s exclusive statutory power to grant or refuse – s14 and s22 – s54(1)(a)(v) is a post‑appointment removal ground, not a pre‑appointment bar – court may not interdict Master’s appointment of nominated executor; objections to Master and review/removal after appointment are the prescribed remedies.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Personal circumstances did not amount to substantial and compelling reasons to avoid life imprisonment for a heinous home rape.
Sentencing – Rape – Prescribed minimum sentence (life) – Substantial and compelling circumstances – Sentencing triad (seriousness, personal circumstances, interests of society) – Appellate interference only for material misdirection; aggravating factors: breaking and entering, multiple rapes, child witness, psychological harm.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Conviction overturned where contested section 220 admissions, unreliable identification and broken chain of custody rendered evidence insufficient.
Criminal law – admissibility and validity of admissions in terms of s115(2)/s220 CPA; right to be warned – admissibility of extra-curial admissions; re-opening defence – when refusal is material; identification evidence – dock identification vs contemporaneous statements; chain of custody and ballistic linkage – proof required; appellate review – material misdirection vitiating conviction.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Failure to warn accused of applicable minimum-sentencing regime and misreference to statutory subsection vitiated a life sentence; substituted with 15 years.
Criminal law – Minimum sentencing – Applicability and requirement to inform accused of minimum sentencing provisions (Criminal Law Amendment Act) – Material misdirection where accused not warned and wrong subsection referenced. Fair trial rights – section 35(3) – prejudice where accused not informed of increased sentencing regime. Sentencing – substantial and compelling circumstances – personal circumstances insufficient where aggravating features (victim under 16, threat with weapon) prevail. Appellate intervention – substitution of sentence where trial court’s sentencing discretion vitiated by defect.
|
10 July 2024 |
|
Rule 30 cannot be used to obstruct substantive proceedings; application to set aside reinstated condonation was dismissed.
Civil procedure – Uniform Rules of Court – Rule 30 and 30A (irregular proceedings) – Rule 30 intended to address formal irregularities, not substantive litigation strategy. Civil procedure – Use of Rule 30 to set aside a reinstated or re-launched application after withdrawal – inappropriate where it obstructs expeditious disposal. Costs – de bonis propriis – punitive costs reserved for egregious attorney conduct; not warranted here. Rules of court – rules are tools to facilitate access to justice and should not hinder substantive progress.
|
4 July 2024 |
|
An exception to an unjust enrichment claim was dismissed because pleadings disclosed a prima facie condictio sine causa.
Unjust enrichment – condictio sine causa – exception (Rule 23) – pleadings must disclose cause of action – charitable construction of pleadings – locus standi – vagueness and embarrassment.
|
3 July 2024 |
|
Withdrawal after respondents answered ordinarily attracts a costs order against the withdrawing applicants; Biowatch inapplicable.
Rule 41(1) – withdrawal of proceedings – ordinary rule that withdrawing party liable for costs; affidavit deponents’ personal knowledge requirement; Biowatch principle inapplicable to withdrawal after respondents answered; discretion to award costs including counsel on Scale B.
|
3 July 2024 |
|
A sub‑lessor with a valid head‑lease may evict a sub‑lessee; sale of business does not grant title to immovable property.
Property/lease law – Eviction – Sub‑lease void for breach of head lease clause – Sub‑lessor’s locus standi to evict upon lease termination – Sale of business as going concern does not transfer immovable property – Condonation – Costs on attorney‑and‑client scale.
|
1 July 2024 |
|
Leave to appeal refused — applicants failed to show reasonable prospects of success under section 17(1)(a); costs awarded.
Appeal — leave to appeal under s17(1)(a) Superior Courts Act — reasonable prospects test ('would' requirement); interlocutory interdicts and delay; disputes of fact and Plascon-Evans; non-joinder; costs.
|
1 July 2024 |
| June 2024 |
|
|
Joinder of publishers/editors unnecessary where suggested third parties lack a direct and substantial interest in the defamation relief sought.
Defamation – group publications – alleged group defamation and whether publishers/editors/printers must be joined. Joinder/non-joinder – test of necessity: direct and substantial interest in subject-matter or in any order the court might make. Plaintiffs entitled to choose defendants from group of wrongdoers; potential adverse findings against non-parties do not automatically require joinder. Uniform Rule 10(3) and authorities on joinder of necessity considered.
|
27 June 2024 |