Esheria Namibia Case Law
Sign in
Namibia Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Namibia Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Namibia case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Namibia decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Contract law [2023] NAHCMD 552

Zannier Hotels Namibia (Pty) Ltd t/a Sonop Lodge v Day Dreamers Investments CC and Others (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON-2023/02159)

Zannier Hotels Namibia (Pty) Ltd t/a Sonop Lodge v Day Dreamers Investments CC and Others (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON-2023/02159) [2023] NAHCMD 552 (7 September 2023)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON-2023/02159

The High Court refused summary judgment in a damages claim over alleged fraudulent VAT charges, finding the defendants had raised a possible bona fide defence.

  • Summary judgment
  • Misrepresentation
  • Damages
  • Vat fraud
  • Summary-judgment
  • Bona-fide-defence
Read case analysis
Contract law [2022] NAHCMD 595

Christoph v Tuyenikumwe Food and Commodity Distributors CC (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 561 of 2022)

Christoph v Tuyenikumwe Food and Commodity Distributors CC (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 561 of 2022) [2022] NAHCMD 595 (31 October 2022)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 561 of 2022

The High Court refused summary judgment, finding a triable defence and unclear pleadings in a property-sale dispute involving alleged breach, misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment.

  • Summary judgment
  • Breach of contract
  • Unjust enrichment
  • Misrepresentation
  • Summary-judgment
  • Breach-of-contract
Read case analysis
Contract law [2022] NAHCMD 225

Delport v Alweendo (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-OTH- 3810 of 2019)

Delport v Alweendo (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-OTH- 3810 of 2019) [2022] NAHCMD 225 (6 May 2022)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
HC-MD-CIV-ACT-OTH- 3810 of 2019

The High Court dismissed a claim for dissolution of an alleged partnership, finding no valid consensus on partnership terms and that a key document was induced by misrepresentation.

  • Partnership
  • Misrepresentation
  • Oral agreement
  • Tacit agreement
  • Dissolution of partnership
  • Oral-agreement
Read case analysis
Contract law [2022] NAHCMD 211

Tulela Processing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Weatherly Mining Namibia Ltd and Another (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 94 of 2021)

Tulela Processing Solutions (Pty) Ltd v Weatherly Mining Namibia Ltd and Another (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 94 of 2021) [2022] NAHCMD 211 (22 April 2022)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 94 of 2021

The plaintiff's withdrawal of the action without tendering costs was unjustified as there were no sound reasons to deprive the defendants of their costs. The defendants' review of the Competition Commission's approval was within their rights and not a breach of the cooperation clause. The plaintiff's case was weak, and its failure to challenge the Minister's decision further demonstrated this. Costs are awarded to the defendants on the ordinary scale, not punitive.

Source excerpt

  • Withdrawal of proceedings
  • Costs
  • Misrepresentation
  • Rectification of contract
  • Suspensive conditions
  • Competition law review
Read case analysis
Contract law [2021] NAHCMD 555

Hoff v Hoff (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 4966 of 2018)

Hoff v Hoff (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 4966 of 2018) [2021] NAHCMD 555 (30 November 2021)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
HC-MD-CIV-ACT-CON- 4966 of 2018

The settlement agreement between the parties was a valid compromise, intended to end litigation and bar further claims on the same cause of action. Clause 26 expressly settled all present, past, and future claims. The plaintiff did not seek rescission of the agreement for misrepresentation but claimed damages for breach, which is not supported by the pleadings. Therefore, the plaintiff is precluded from pursuing the present claim.

Source excerpt

  • Settlement agreement
  • Compromise
  • Res judicata
  • Misrepresentation
  • Exemption clauses
Read case analysis
Civil procedure [2021] NAHCMD 467

Murandi v Kamuzeri (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-OTH- 4833 of 2020)

Murandi v Kamuzeri (HC-MD-CIV-ACT-OTH- 4833 of 2020) [2021] NAHCMD 467 (7 October 2021)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
HC-MD-CIV-ACT-OTH- 4833 of 2020

The High Court held that the plaintiff failed to prove fraud or misrepresentation and dismissed his eviction claim, ordering transfer of the property to the defendant.

  • Eviction
  • Fraud
  • Misrepresentation
  • Sale of property
  • Transfer of property
  • Property-transfer
Read case analysis
Criminal law [2021] NASC 16

State v Dias and Other (SA 53 of 2015)

State v Dias and Other (SA 53 of 2015) [2021] NASC 16 (13 April 2021)

Court
Supreme Court
Case number
SA 53 of 2015

The respondents, acting with common purpose, devised and implemented a scheme to misrepresent the dispatch and invoicing of goods, enabling a client to purchase on credit beyond his limit. Their conduct constituted repeated misrepresentations to their employer, exposing the company to actual and potential prejudice. The High Court erred in treating multiple counts as a single charge and in failing to appreciate the evidence of common purpose and fraud. The acquittal is set aside and replaced with convictions on counts 1–137.

Source excerpt

  • Fraud
  • Common purpose
  • Misrepresentation
  • Potential prejudice
  • Procedural irregularity
  • Splitting of charges
Read case analysis
Contract law [2021] NAHCNLD 19

Matheus v Matheus and Others (HC-NLD-CIV-ACT-CON 208 of 2018)

Matheus v Matheus and Others (HC-NLD-CIV-ACT-CON 208 of 2018) [2021] NAHCNLD 19 (9 March 2021)

Court
Northern Local Division
Case number
HC-NLD-CIV-ACT-CON 208 of 2018

The plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the first defendant misrepresented facts which induced the transfer of the property. The evidence was unreliable, self-contradictory, and did not establish that the transfer was subject to any condition or reservation. Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief sought.

Source excerpt

  • Misrepresentation
  • Alienation of property
  • Burden of proof
  • Restitution
  • Donation
  • Cancellation of contract
Read case analysis
Contract law [2019] NAHCMD 557

Jupiter Import and Export CC v Global Fishing Enterprises CC (1 of 2014)

Jupiter Import and Export CC v Global Fishing Enterprises CC (1 of 2014) [2019] NAHCMD 557 (16 December 2019)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
1 of 2014

The High Court dismissed a claim for damages over allegedly infested dried fish, finding no proved misrepresentation, breach, or entitlement to refund.

  • Material misrepresentation
  • Breach of contract
  • Damages
  • Agency agreement
  • Implied warranty
  • Contract-law
Read case analysis
Contract law [2019] NAHCMD 259

Luhl v Solsquare Energy (Pty) Limited (2512 of 2013)

Luhl v Solsquare Energy (Pty) Limited (2512 of 2013) [2019] NAHCMD 259 (29 July 2019)

Court
High Court Main Division
Case number
2512 of 2013

High Court of Namibia decision on a wind turbine sale dispute. The plaintiff succeeded in canceling the agreement and recovering his deposit and expenses.

  • Misrepresentation
  • Damages
  • Counterclaim
  • Guarantee
  • Restitution
  • Cancellation-of-contract
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Namibia decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.