|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2024 |
|
|
A court may not decide substantive relief where the applicant’s cause of action was extinguished before first‑instance judgment.
Practice and procedure – subpoena duces tecum – cause of action ceased before first‑instance judgment – high court lacked jurisdiction to decide merits; Patient confidentiality and procedure for obtaining medical records – relevance only if documents are in possession or control of target; Mootness and justiciability – courts must strike from roll where lis extinguished before hearing; Costs – party who persists with dead cause of action liable for costs, including wasted trial costs and two counsel.
|
30 December 2024 |
|
Unauthorised commitment of unappropriated funds invalidates procurement, but an innocent contractor may recover equitable payment.
Procurement law; PFMA s 38(2) – prohibition on committing unappropriated funds; treasury cash‑management rules; invalidity of award and contract; s 172(1)(b) equitable remedies for innocent contractors who performed under invalid procurement decisions.
|
27 December 2024 |
|
A creditor must prove indebtedness to invoke s 345(1)(a); just and equitable winding up warranted where directors wilfully obstruct and companies are dormant.
Companies — Winding‑up — Creditor locus standi under s 345(1)(a) (old Act) — creditor must prove indebtedness on balance of probabilities. Companies — Winding‑up — Shareholder relief on just and equitable grounds — dormant companies, non‑filing, disposal of sole asset and directors' non‑cooperation. Civil procedure — Condonation and reinstatement of lapsed appeals — prospects of success decisive. Insolvency/companies — Directors' statutory duties — refusal to cooperate with provisional liquidators as ground for winding up. Costs — intervening associated company ordered to pay costs of condonation and leave to appeal.
|
24 December 2024 |
|
Placing a company in business rescue suspends but does not extinguish liquidation; dispositions after winding‑up remain void.
Companies law – Dispositions after commencement of winding‑up – s 341(2) old Companies Act – void and not validated by subsequent business rescue; Business rescue – s 131(6) new Companies Act – suspends but does not terminate liquidation proceedings; Insolvency principle – concursus creditorum preserved; Statutory interpretation – ‘suspend’ not ‘set aside’; Relevant authorities: Pride Milling; GCC Engineering.
|
20 December 2024 |
|
The Master cannot authorise persons as trustees unless they were validly appointed by the trust deed, s 7 or a court order.
Trusts – appointment of trustees – trustees must be appointed in terms of the trust instrument; Master’s authorisation under s 6(1) only valid where appointment arises from trust deed, s 7 or court order – Master has no power to validate appointments made outside those bases; locus standi to amend trust deed under s 13 requires sufficient interest; acquiescence cannot cure unlawful trustee appointments.
|
19 December 2024 |
|
Court ordered prompt return under Article 12; Article 13(b) defence not established; separation of late constitutional challenge justified.
Hague Convention – Article 12 jurisdictional requirements; Article 13(b) grave-risk exception – high threshold; admissibility and weight of expert reports; attachment formed due to wrongful retention; separation of late constitutional challenge under s 173 to protect urgency; relevance of protective undertakings and Central Authority cooperation; compliance with Article 11 expeditiousness obligation.
|
19 December 2024 |
|
Reported
Advisory note not administrative action; LPA s116(2) does not oust advocates’ societies’ common‑law standing.
Administrative law – PAJA – whether an advisory note constitutes administrative action with direct, external legal effect; Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 – s116(2) – interpretation in context with s44 – transitional arrangements for pending striking‑off/suspension proceedings; advocates’ societies’ locus standi and High Court’s inherent jurisdiction preserved; regulator is primary but not exclusive custodian of professional discipline.
|
19 December 2024 |
|
Reported
NERSA Codes bind licensees; Eskom must assume and implement loadshedding where municipalities fail.
Electricity regulation – NERSA Codes as binding licence conditions – Eskom’s duty as Systems Operator to protect grid integrity and to assume loadshedding where municipalities fail – oral curtailment agreements non-compliant with 2019 Code unenforceable – interim interdict restraining loadshedding set aside.
|
18 December 2024 |
|
Non‑disclosures and missing LLB certificate were remedied; good cause found and admission granted despite contravening LPC rule 22.1.5.
Admission of legal practitioners – disclosure obligations in ex parte applications; LPC rule 22.1.5 – holding office/directorship during candidate attorney service; Failure to attach LLB certificate – requirement to explain indebtedness and condonation; PVT contract not void ab initio where good cause shown; Fitness and propriety assessment.
|
13 December 2024 |
|
Minister must decide on appropriate relief after Ombud upholds complaint; Ombud's recommendations advisory, not binding.
Military Ombud Act s 6(8) — nature of Ombud recommendations — whether binding or advisory; Ombud decision to uphold complaint final; Minister's duty to consider recommendations and decide appropriate relief; review remedies under s 13 and PAJA.
|
12 December 2024 |
|
Reported
A s112(2) written admission of a complainant’s age dispenses with State proof and supports imposition of prescribed life sentence.
Criminal procedure – section 112(2) plea – admissions of fact in written plea may support conviction without separate proof; Criminal procedure – section 311 appeal – question of law where legal effect of s112(2) admission is in issue; Sentencing – prescribed minimum sentences (Part 1 Schedule 2 CLAA and s57(1) SORMA) – no substantial and compelling circumstances to depart from life imprisonment for rape of child under 12; Binding precedent – Hamisi and Malgas applied.
|
12 December 2024 |
|
Reported
Whether an agency may lawfully use its funds to procure security for officials of another department and their families.
Administrative law – self-review under the legality principle – condonation for delay; Prescription Act – public-law review not a debt; Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act – scope and application to intergovernmental disputes; Statutory interpretation – scope of agency powers to act ‘necessary for realisation of objects’; Illegality – ultra vires procurement of protection for officials of another department and minister’s children; s172(1)(b) relief – just and equitable considerations in ordering repayment; Public finance and procurement – unlawful contract reviewable and voidable.
|
12 December 2024 |
|
Reported
A testator may authorise an executor-attorney to charge professional fees; Taxing Master’s disallowance was set aside.
Administration of estates – s 51(1)(a) – testator may fix executor’s remuneration including professional/legal fees; Executors who are attorneys – permitted to charge professional fees where will expressly authorises same; Taxation – review and setting aside of Taxing Master’s disallowance and allocator; Interaction with Estate Fawcus – principle displaced where will authorises fees.
|
12 December 2024 |
|
An incomplete appeal record must be reconstructed and the petition reconsidered to protect the right to appeal and a fair trial.
Criminal procedure – Appeal record – Incomplete or missing trial transcripts – duty on appellant/legal representative to ensure complete record – reconstruction of record – remittal for fresh consideration (Muravha; S v Leslie; S v Schoombee).
|
12 December 2024 |
|
Reported
Whether payments into an attorney’s trust account were 'entrusted' to the firm, attracting Fidelity Fund reimbursement.
Attorneys Act s 26(a) – meaning of 'entrust' (possession + held subject to trust; payer's intention decisive); Payments into a trust account are not per se 'entrustment' – conduit payments for onward transmission do not qualify; Fidelity Fund liability arises where money was entrusted and stolen by practitioner or employee in course of practice; s 47(1)(g) defence irrelevant where theft occurred prior to any investment instruction.
|
11 December 2024 |
|
A body corporate may cede its extension right; owners' veto limited—consent cannot be withheld without good cause.
Sectional Titles Act s 25(6) and STSMA s 5(1)(b) – right of extension vested in body corporate – certificate of real right required for exercise or cession. Cession/sale of a right of extension is a transfer of a limited real right, not an alienation of common property requiring unanimous resolution under s 5(1)(a). Owners’ and mortgagees’ written consent required for exercise/cession but may not be withheld 'without good cause in law'. 'Good cause' depends on context – inadequate disclosure, related‑party transactions, insolvency/enrichment risk and diminution in value can justify withholding consent. Courts may compel execution of required consents where withholding is unjustified and may authorise substitutes (Sheriff) to sign if necessary.
|
9 December 2024 |
|
Municipal approval of share transfer was administrative action and reviewable for failure to oversee and consult on BBBEE selection.
Administrative law – municipal consent to change in control of a water services concessionaire constitutes administrative action when it derives from municipal powers under public law; conditional consent requiring municipal oversight and consultation is binding; failure to oversee/consult and conflicts of interest in selection process render subsequent approval unlawful, irrational and reviewable; internal municipal appeal under s 62 not required where rights have already accrued; remedial relief must be proportionate and not include unnecessary directions.
|
5 December 2024 |
|
An unappealed summary-judgment and bona fide auction transfer cannot be set aside absent purchaser's bad faith and knowledge of defect.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal (s 17 Superior Courts Act) – reasonable prospects of success; Summary judgment – finality of orders – appeal or rescission required to impugn; Execution – Uniform Rule 46A and reserve price for primary residence; Sale in execution – setting aside requires purchaser’s mala fides and knowledge of defect; Transfer – bona fide auction and abstract theory protect title.
|
5 December 2024 |
|
Reported
Under PAIA a forensic report was not privileged (or privilege was waived) and public‑interest override required disclosure.
Promotion of Access to Information Act – access to private-body records – default in favour of disclosure; Legal professional privilege – dominant-purpose test for protection; Implied waiver by partial disclosure; PAIA s 70 public‑interest override – disclosure where record likely reveals evidence of substantial contraventions of law; Admissibility of new evidence on appeal – exceptional circumstances required.
|
4 December 2024 |
|
Reconsideration refused: no exceptional circumstances to upset a R30,000 solatium award for 42‑hour unlawful detention; Biowatch inapplicable.
Administrative law – s 17(2)(f) Superior Courts Act – reconsideration of refused leave to appeal; Constitutional/delictual claims – unlawful arrest and detention – quantum of solatium; Assessment factors for damages for deprivation of liberty; Biowatch cost principles not applicable to delictual claims.
|
4 December 2024 |
|
A signed draft without ministerial concurrence does not constitute a binding s 42D settlement and cannot be reviewed or set aside.
Restitution Act s 42D – Settlement agreements – concurrence/signature by Minister required for binding settlement; absence of signature, payment or acceptance means no concluded agreement; Review and PAJA – no administrative action where no decision taken to conclude settlement; s 33 factors – relevance only if compensation decision has been made; High Court erred by reviewing non‑existent agreement.
|
2 December 2024 |
| November 2024 |
|
|
Reported
Lengthy pre-sentencing detention alone does not justify avoiding a prescribed life sentence.
Sentence — life imprisonment — substantial and compelling circumstances — effect of lengthy pre-sentencing detention — awaiting-trial custody is a factor but not, by itself, a ground to deviate from mandatory life where delay is not exceptional or is caused by the accused.
|
29 November 2024 |
|
Reported
Fraudulent court representation by a struck‑off legal practitioner can vitiate proceedings and justify remittal.
Consumer Protection Act – applicability where sale involved finance – goods subject to credit agreements remain within CPA; implied warranty of quality (ss 55, 56) – supplier liability for defective motor vehicle; legal practice – representation by a practitioner struck from the roll – fraud and public interest implications; administration of justice – whether fraud by counsel vitiates judgment; remedy – remittal for fresh hearing where integrity of process is impugned.
|
29 November 2024 |
|
Where Building Standards Act applicability is unclear, courts may order SPLUMA remedial measures instead of demolition.
Constitutional and administrative law — applicability of National Building Regulations in former homelands; requirement to cite Minister when challenging constitutionality of Rationalisation Act; SPLUMA (s 32 & s 33) grants courts broad discretion to order preventative or remedial measures instead of demolition; municipal failure to promulgate by‑laws and vagueness in pleadings affects remedy and costs.
|
22 November 2024 |
|
Six-year delayed review of Premier’s removal of headmen was not condoned; PAJA time-limits and customary-law rules decisive.
Customary law – traditional leadership – Limpopo Traditional Leadership and Institutional Act 6 of 2005 – relief of royal duties (s 13) and appointment process (s 12).; Administrative law – PAJA s 7(1) – review proceedings instituted after 180 days are prima facie unreasonable; condonation governed by interests of justice.; Framework Act s 21 – internal remedies do not apply where the disputed administrative action is that of the Premier; Premier cannot be both party and internal adjudicator.; Procedural point – no legal status for 'village royal family'; only the royal family may identify headmen/headwomen; absence of prospects of success negates condonation.
|
18 November 2024 |
|
A court, as upper guardian, may refuse parental settlement terms inconsistent with a minor child's best interests.
Family law — Divorce — Settlement agreement providing for primary residence and care — Court's duty as upper guardian to determine child's best interests — Family Advocate reports assist but are not binding — Credibility findings and exercise of discretion — Costs orders for improper litigation conduct.
|
18 November 2024 |
|
Reported
Whether trace alcohol in added flavourings qualifies as 'non-alcoholic' for liqueur tariff classification.
Customs and Excise — tariff classification — interpretation of Additional Note 4(b) to Chapter 22 — meaning of 'non-alcoholic ingredients' — ordinary grammatical meaning (no alcohol) — Note 3 (0.5% ABV) limited to Heading 22.02 — SARS policy and de minimis principle not to redefine statutory terms — correct classification under 2208.70.22 (104.23.22).
|
15 November 2024 |
|
Substantive appeal rendered moot by completion certificate, but appellate court may decide outstanding reserved costs as exceptional circumstances.
Superior Courts Act s 16(2) – mootness and practical effect of appeals; reserved costs – failure to exercise judicial discretion as exceptional circumstances permitting appellate interference; wasted costs for late disclosure of completion certificate; limits on declaratory relief under s 172 when matter is academic.
|
14 November 2024 |
|
The appellant's unauthorised transfers, payments and usurpation of company operations warranted a delinquent director declaration under s162(5)(c).
Company law – s 162(5)(c) Companies Act – delinquent director – gross abuse of position; conflict of interest – ss 75, 76 and 78 breaches; unauthorised transfers and payments; usurpation of corporate opportunities; declaration mandatory where statutory threshold met.
|
14 November 2024 |
|
Failure by a valuation board to assess expert evidence and give reasons renders its decision irrational and reviewable, but not substitutable by court.
Administrative law – valuation appeals – duty of specialist tribunal to assess and evaluate expert evidence and to give reasons – failure to give reasons renders decision irrational and reviewable – separation of powers bars appellate substitution of administrative fact‑finding.
|
13 November 2024 |
|
Whether an HOA may impose developer‑linked penalty levies on subsequent owners who did not receive transfer from the developer.
Community schemes; contractual interpretation of HOA constitution; clause 9.10 – developer-linked three-year development period; liability attaches to member who received transfer from developer, not to property; courts cannot read-in to impose penalty levies on subsequent owners.
|
12 November 2024 |
|
Reported
When the high court sits as a court of first instance on a statutory appeal, leave to appeal to the SCA must be sought from that court.
Administrative law – statutory appeal from CSOS adjudicator – appeal to high court is a statutory appeal on a question of law; high court sits as court of first instance. Superior Courts Act – s 16(1)(a) v s 16(1)(b) and s 17(3): where high court is court of first instance, leave to appeal to SCA must be sought from the court a quo. Jurisdiction – special leave granted by SCA where leave should have been sought from court a quo is a nullity; SCA cannot assume jurisdiction under s173 to cure that defect.
|
12 November 2024 |
|
Owner proved title and possession; hearsay-based defence failed, PIE inapplicable, eviction ordered.
• Property law – rei vindicatio – owner must prove ownership and that respondents hold the res; onus on respondents to establish right to remain.
• Evidence – hearsay – inadmissible or insufficient where s 3(1)(c) factors not applied; self-serving hearsay cannot defeat rei vindicatio.
• Eviction law – challenge to title or lease is not a defence to eviction unless title is set aside or a legal right to occupy is shown.
• PIE – does not apply to eviction from non-residential property (educare centre).
• Civil procedure – practice directives and hand-picking a full bench must not fetter judicial discretion or expand issues beyond those pleaded.
|
12 November 2024 |
|
Reported
Section 32 of the MFMA imposes mandatory personal monetary liability on municipal officials for irregular expenditure, independent of proven loss.
Local government finance – MFMA s 32 – statutory monetary liability for unauthorised, irregular or fruitless and wasteful expenditure; MFMA s 176(1) – protection against third‑party liability does not limit s 32 recovery; delay in review – irrelevant to s 32 claim; correction of duplicative orders.
|
8 November 2024 |
|
No special leave where appellant failed to prove alleged spear tackle on admissible evidence.
Civil appeal — delict — alleged rugby-style spear tackle causing cervical spinal injury; evidentiary onus — plaintiff required to prove pleaded assault and intention to harm; admissibility — inadmissible criminal-trial hearsay and untested witness evidence cannot be relied upon; expert evidence — opinions given on hypotheticals have limited value; special leave — no special circumstances to justify further appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
|
6 November 2024 |
|
Reported
Separation of the 'community' issue was proper; claimants failed to prove communal rights and punitive fee repayment was overturned.
Restitution of Land Rights Act – meaning of 'community' – requirement that rights be derived from shared rules determining access to land held in common; labour tenancy and farm-worker regimes do not satisfy that test. Civil procedure – Rule 57(1)(c) – separation of issues for convenient and expeditious determination of discrete legal issues at close of evidence. Costs – disallowance and repayment of legal practitioners' fees in restitution litigation – protection afforded by the Restitution Act and the Commission's role; punitive costs orders inappropriate absent wilfulness or abuse. Judicial conduct – recusal – allegations of bias must be substantiated; reliance on precedent does not establish bias.
|
4 November 2024 |
| October 2024 |
|
|
Reported
A Constitutional Court order making s5(1)(a) invalid prospectively does not invalidate prior extradition arrests or warrants.
Constitutional law – declaration of invalidity – prospectivity versus retrospectivity – effect of an express prospective order by the Constitutional Court. Extradition – Extradition Act s 5(1)(a) – magistrate’s role in issuing arrest warrants following ministerial notification – procedural fairness and requirement to apply judicial mind. Civil procedure – review and appeal – limits on relief where higher court’s order prescribes prospective effect.
|
31 October 2024 |
|
No exceptional circumstances for reconsideration; expert evidence showed an acute intrapartum brain injury and causation from alleged negligence was not proven.
s 17(2)(f) Superior Courts Act — reconsideration — high threshold for exceptional circumstances; medical negligence — intrapartum acute profound hypoxic‑ischaemic brain injury — causation; admissibility of fresh evidence on appeal — weight, prima facie truth and material relevance; expert opinion — probative value tied to proven facts.
|
28 October 2024 |
|
Reported
Admitting further affidavits under s9 is permissible; persistent emails and a racial slur cumulatively constituted harassment.
Protection from Harassment Act s 9(2) — court may consider further affidavits or oral evidence on return date; discretion to admit evidence while protecting audi alteram partem rights — admission of replying affidavit not automatically unfair where opportunity to respond afforded. Harassment — definition includes electronic communications, threats and conduct causing psychological harm; cumulative conduct may satisfy harassment threshold. Racial slur — reference to "Verwoerd’s kids" in South African context carries racial connotation and may constitute aggravating conduct in harassment proceedings. Relief — final protection order appropriate where on balance of probabilities respondent’s conduct constituted harassment; costs discretionary under s 16.
|
25 October 2024 |
|
Reported
Applicant awarded half the Scharrig option-share benefit, damages fixed at R5.75 per share, and R3m disgorgement for secret profit.
Contract – BEE investments – entitlement to additional Scharrig option shares and quantification of loss; damages assessed on probabilities (sale at R5.75).; Fiduciary duties – no-profit/no-conflict rule – disgorgement of R3m secret profit from unauthorised Strand investment. ; Highest intermediate value rule (US) rejected for contractual claims. ; In duplum rule – not developed/suspended; interest capped accordingly. ; Contempt – accounting compliance found; contempt not established. ; Res judicata/issue estoppel – prior SCA findings bind associate under Spearhead agreement.
|
23 October 2024 |
|
Disclosure order obtained without joining affected owners of confidential records was irregular and was rescinded; joinder and leave to oppose granted.
• Administrative law – disclosure of administrative decision records under s 96 MPRDA and Regulation 74 – requirements for service and joinder of affected persons.
• Civil procedure – rescission under rule 42(1)(a) – order erroneously sought or granted in absence of affected party.
• Procedural fairness – non-joinder of persons with direct and substantial interest renders disclosure order irregular.
• Remedy – rescission, joinder, leave to oppose and costs; court may not supplement an order in place of granting/refusing rescission.
|
23 October 2024 |
|
Reported
Court invalidates GMO permit approval due to failure in applying the precautionary principle and conducting environmental assessments.
Genetically Modified Organisms – Risk assessment – Precautionary principle under NEMA – Environmental impact assessment requirements under Genetically Modified Organisms Act.
|
22 October 2024 |
|
Township‑establishment conditions imposed under s 98 are administrative acts binding the developer to operate and maintain estate sanitation plants.
Town‑Planning and Townships Ordinance s 98 – municipality may impose township‑establishment conditions. Promotion of Administrative Justice Act – conditions imposed under s 98 constitute administrative action and remain binding until set aside. Developer liability – express acceptance and conduct can create binding private obligations to construct, operate and maintain sanitation infrastructure. Municipal obligations – constitutional duty to supervise, distinct from developer’s private obligations; not jointly liable for private estate plants. Environmental and Water Act compliance – operator must obtain requisite water‑use licences and comply with environmental law.
|
21 October 2024 |
|
A judge’s failure to recuse when a reasonable apprehension of bias exists renders a provisional sequestration order void and it must be set aside.
Constitutional and procedural law – Recusal – reasonable apprehension of bias – judicial officer’s position as trustee and prior representative involvement in related sectional-title affairs may create an interest requiring recusal. Judicial conduct – findings of Judicial Conduct Committee – unchallenged JCC findings may be relied upon by courts in determining disqualification and appearance of bias. Insolvency law – provisional sequestration – where presiding judge ought to have recused, provisional sequestration order is a nullity and must be set aside and remitted.
|
21 October 2024 |
|
Reported
A s7 nolle prosequi certificate is not PAJA administrative action; DPP may reissue/include charges and private prosecution may proceed.
Criminal procedure – private prosecution – s 7 Criminal Procedure Act – nolle prosequi certificate as formal document not administrative action under PAJA – decision not to prosecute reviewable on legality/rationality – DPP need only form prima facie view from docket – re-issue of certificate and inclusion of additional charges permissible – locus standi and injury are factual matters for trial – frontal challenges discouraged where dilatory.
|
17 October 2024 |
|
Conviction for VAT-refund fraud set aside where State failed to prove the appellant knew invoices were fictitious.
Criminal law – fraud – VAT refund claims supported by fictitious invoices – whether representation and resubmission of documents establish knowledge and intent to defraud – statutory offences under s 59 VAT Act and s 269(6) TAA – validity and applicability where repeal and commencement dates conflict.
|
16 October 2024 |
|
A consent settlement order is binding and operates as res judicata, barring later review of the same issues; appeal dismissed.
Environmental law – NEMA environmental authorisation – consent settlement order – effect as court order – res judicata and finality; Procedural law – non-parties aware of proceedings who do not intervene or seek rescission bound by settlement order; Administrative law – condonation under s 47C NEMA; Costs – application of Biowatch/s 32(2) NEMA principles, costs following result.
|
11 October 2024 |
|
Reported
Cross-appeal struck for lack of leave; respondent failed to prove malicious detention, claim dismissed.
Appeal and jurisdiction – leave to appeal/cross-appeal as jurisdictional requirement; Unlawful/malicious detention – elements of malicious deprivation of liberty (instigation, absence of reasonable and probable cause, animus iniuriandi); Duty of police and prosecutors to disclose all relevant and readily available evidence (including exculpatory/negative DNA results) in bail proceedings; Relevance of neutral/negative DNA evidence to bail and causation in delictual claims.
|
11 October 2024 |
|
Reported
A contract subject to a suspensive condition that has lapsed cannot be revived by a post-expiry addendum; refund ordered.
Property law – suspensive condition – non-fulfilment by fixed date causes lapse of contract; thereafter agreement cannot be revived by a subsequent addendum; addendum executed post-expiry invalid as revival; formalities under Alienation of Land Act considered; refund of monies paid into trust account ordered.
|
10 October 2024 |
|
Reported
Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by determining causation; seriousness must be reassessed by a properly constituted psychiatric tribunal.
Road Accident Fund – assessment of ‘serious injury’ under s 17 and RAF Regulations; Appeal Tribunal’s powers limited to medical assessment of seriousness (WPI and narrative test); Tribunal may not decide causation—which is a judicial question; tribunal composition and procedural fairness; appropriateness of expert evidence (speciality relevance).
|
8 October 2024 |
