Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
Hlatshwayo v First Rand Bank Limited and Others (27859/2015) [2025] ZAGPPHC 679 (8 July 2025)
The High Court granted leave to appeal against an order striking an urgent application from the roll in a property transfer dispute after a sale in execution.
Ellis Structural and Civil Engineers CC v Egan Property Group (Pty) Ltd (23229/2018) [2025] ZAGPPHC 671 (8 July 2025)
The court held that the debts under the written and oral agreements became due monthly as the plaintiff was entitled to issue invoices for services rendered. The power to issue invoices lay solely with the plaintiff, and its failure to do so could not delay the running of prescription. The last possible date for the debts to become due was July 2014, and prescription commenced running from August 2014. Summons was issued in April 2018, after the three-year prescription period had expired for all claims. The court found that the alleged interruptions of prescription in June 2015 and May 2016 d…
Source excerpt
Mhlongo v Netball South Africa (071849/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 727 (8 July 2025)
The High Court stayed an application pending arbitration under Netball South Africa’s Constitution and ordered the applicant to pay costs on the points in limine.
Fihlani v Port St Johns Local Municipality and Others (1046/2025) [2025] ZAECMHC 66 (8 July 2025)
The High Court held that the municipality unlawfully extended a municipal manager’s precautionary suspension and dismissed its constitutional challenge to the regulation.
Minister of Police v Qwela and Others (Reasons) (2025/088899) [2025] ZAECMHC 62 (8 July 2025)
The High Court struck an urgent application from the roll, finding the Minister of Police had not shown genuine urgency and had delayed too long after attachment.
Jordan v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (2025/055433) [2025] ZAGPJHC 663 (8 July 2025)
The court found that the applicant's grounds for leave to appeal do not have reasonable prospects of success. The applicant failed to establish locus standi, and his role and interest in the subject matter remain unclear. The requirements of Section 17 of the Superior Courts Act were not met, as there is no compelling reason for the appeal to be heard and no reasonable prospect that another court would come to a different conclusion. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed, and costs are awarded to the respondents.
Source excerpt
Selatile v National Home Builders Registration Council and Others (JR1437/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 309 (8 July 2025)
The Labour Court struck a review from the roll because the applicant failed to file the arbitration record within time and did not seek an extension.
Hlamandana and Another v Premier, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and Others (Leave to Appeal) (2227/2023) [2025] ZAECMHC 61 (8 July 2025)
The court found that the applicants' grounds for leave to appeal were without merit. The remittal order was justified under Section 8(1)(c)(i) of PAJA and Section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution, which empower courts to grant just and equitable remedies, including remittal for reconsideration by the administrator. The applicants' argument that the remittal was not sought by any party was rejected, as the relief sought was broad enough to encompass such an order. The court held that the fourth respondent was lawfully appointed and the proceedings were still extant, thus he was not functus offici…
Source excerpt
Eskom Holdingd Soc Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation Arbitrator and Others (JR170/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 313 (8 July 2025)
The Labour Court granted condonation for a late leave-to-appeal application, but refused leave because Eskom showed no reasonable prospects of success.
Norvena Property Consortium (Pty) Ltd v Mashamba and Others (2022/018083) [2025] ZAGPJHC 683 (7 July 2025)
The High Court granted an eviction order after finding the applicant had complied with PIE, proved substantial rental arrears, and the respondent had no valid defence.
Explore more
