Tikbox League (Pty) Ltd and Others v Du Toit and Others (B1342/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2025; 2024 (3) SA 198 (GP) (18 December 2023)

Tikbox League (Pty) Ltd and Others v Du Toit and Others (B1342/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2025; 2024 (3) SA 198 (GP) (18 December 2023)

The court held that the contract to arrange boxing contests between members of the public, where participants intentionally apply bodily force to settle disputes for profit and fame, is unlawful, contra bones mores, and unenforceable. The event was not legalised under the South African Boxing Act or related regulations, and lawful consent could not be granted for such inherently dangerous contests. Public policy, the Constitution, and statutory provisions criminalise not only the acts but also association and agreements facilitating such activities. The proceeds from these events are the result of unlawful contracts and activities, and any attempt to enforce such contracts is invalid. The...

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 2025
Parties
Applicant: Tikbox League (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Daniel Christoffel van Heerden; Applicant: Lindrie Gouws; Applicant: Dominant Slap League (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Francois Jakobus Du Toit; Respondent: Companies and Intellectual Properties Commission; Respondent: Jire Itikets (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Anita Louise Whittaker / Myburg; Respondent: Albertus Johannes Potgieter; Respondent: Johannes Jakobus Jansen van Rensburg
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 December 2023
Case Number
B1342/2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed. No order as to costs. Matter referred to regulatory and prosecutorial authorities.
Judges
Le Grange
Legal Topics
Contra Bones Mores, Illegal Contracts, Consent in Criminal Law, Public Policy, Organised Crime, Unlawful Activity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tikbox League (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Daniel Christoffel van Heerden

Applicant

Lindrie Gouws

Applicant

Dominant Slap League (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Francois Jakobus Du Toit

Respondent

Companies and Intellectual Properties Commission

Respondent

Jire Itikets (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Anita Louise Whittaker / Myburg

Respondent

Albertus Johannes Potgieter

Respondent

Johannes Jakobus Jansen van Rensburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the contract to arrange boxing contests between members of the public is lawful and enforceable.
  2. 2 Whether lawful consent can be granted for intentional bodily harm in such contests.
  3. 3 Whether the proceeds from such contests constitute unlawful activity under South African law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the contract to arrange boxing contests between members of the public, where participants intentionally apply bodily force to settle disputes for profit and fame, is unlawful, contra bones mores, and unenforceable. The event was not legalised under the South African Boxing Act or related regulations, and lawful consent could not be granted for such inherently dangerous contests. Public policy, the Constitution, and statutory provisions criminalise not only the acts but also association and agreements facilitating such activities. The proceeds from these events are the result of unlawful contracts and activities, and any attempt to enforce such contracts is invalid. The...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. No order as to costs. Matter referred to regulatory and prosecutorial authorities.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with no order as to costs.
  • This order is referred to the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission to consider whether the purpose of the company is lawful and if not to address the issue accordingly.