South Africa Case Law

Old Mutual Alternate Risk Transfer Insure Limited v SA Guarantee Specialists Proprietary Limited and Another (2025/127863)

Old Mutual Alternate Risk Transfer Insure Limited v SA Guarantee Specialists Proprietary Limited and Another (2025/127863) [2025] ZAWCHC 345 (13 August 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

2025/127863

Judge

Morrissey AJ

The High Court granted urgent access and inspection relief to an insurer against its underwriting manager after unauthorised offshore guarantees and non-compliance concerns.

• Specific Performance
• Cell Captive Insurance
• Contract Termination
• Data Access Rights
• Breach Of Contract
• Fiduciary Duties

Makua v Firstrand Bank Limited (First National Bank of Southern Africa Limited) (Reasons on Leave to Appeal) (18093/21)

Makua v Firstrand Bank Limited (First National Bank of Southern Africa Limited) (Reasons on Leave to Appeal) (18093/21) [2025] ZAGPPHC 785 (6 August 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

18093/21

Judge

Phooko

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of success and no compelling reason to hear the appeal.

• Leave To Appeal Threshold
• Postponement
• Costs Order
• Ombudsman Referral
• National Credit Act
• Constitutional Rights

Koutroulis and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Another (2025-121587)

Koutroulis and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Another (2025-121587) [2025] ZAGPPHC 765 (31 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-121587

Judge

E van der Schyff

The court found that the attachment of Mr. Koutroulis's Nedbank account was incomplete and invalid because notice of attachment was not given to all interested parties as required by Rule 45(8)(c)(i)(a). Rule 45(12) does not dispense with the notice requirement, and the two rules operate in tandem. The Sheriff’s own return confirmed that satisfaction of the writ had not been demanded from the judgment debtor. The court relied on Riordan v First National Bank Limited and others, which held that irregular attachments without proper notice must be set aside. Furthermore, the summons was not effe…

Source excerpt

• Attachment Of Bank Accounts
• Writ Of Execution
• Urgent Interdict
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Service Of Process

Shapiro v Wolpe (2024/060632)

Shapiro v Wolpe (2024/060632) [2025] ZAGPJHC 752 (30 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/060632

Judge

EF Dippenaar

The High Court granted provisional sequestration against Jonathan Wolpe, finding a prima facie unjust enrichment claim, insolvency indicators, and advantage to creditors.

• Provisional Sequestration
• Unjust Enrichment
• National Credit Act Compliance
• Advantage To Creditors
• Acts Of Insolvency
• Provisional-sequestration

Sigogo (2025-117399), Ex parte

Sigogo (2025-117399), Ex parte [2025] ZAGPPHC 769 (30 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-117399

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court dismissed an urgent ex parte application to preserve estate funds and obtain bank statements, holding that the applicant lacked locus standi.

• Locus Standi
• Estate Administration
• Preservation Of Funds
• Principal Agent Relationship
• Locus-standi
• Estate-administration

Hay v Road Accident Fund (2019/5932)

Hay v Road Accident Fund (2019/5932) [2025] ZAGPJHC 278 (14 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

46032/2018

Judge

Wilson

The applicants withdrew a rescission application. The High Court ordered them to pay costs on the attorney-and-client scale because of a contractual costs clause and the way the case was pursued.

• Costs Scale
• Mortgage Enforcement
• Costs-scale
• Mortgage-enforcement
• Withdrawal-of-application
• Rescission

ABSA Bank Ltd v Tswago (Leave to Appeal) (114422/2023)

ABSA Bank Ltd v Tswago (Leave to Appeal) (114422/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 788 (29 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

114422/2023

Judge

N Davis

Leave to appeal against summary judgment was dismissed. The court held no appeal lay from the default order, rejected new National Credit Act arguments, and awarded punitive costs.

• Summary Judgment
• Leave To Appeal
• Credit Agreement
• Jurisdictional Requirements
• Costs Order
• Summary-judgment

Mercedes-Benz Finance and Insurance, a Division of Mercedes-Benz Financial Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Thobejane (16432/2019)

Mercedes-Benz Finance and Insurance, a Division of Mercedes-Benz Financial Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Thobejane (16432/2019) [2025] ZAGPPHC 733 (28 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

16432/2019

Judge

Stone AJ

The court found that the respondent breached the settlement agreement, which was made an order of court, by failing to make the required payments. The respondent's defences regarding alleged fraudulent conduct and procedural irregularities were unsupported by evidence and did not constitute valid grounds to prevent enforcement of the order. The court held that substance must be preferred over form, and any procedural irregularity in the application was condoned, as the respondent suffered no prejudice and had ample opportunity to respond. The applicant was entitled to judgment in terms of the…

Source excerpt

• Settlement Agreement Enforcement
• Credit Agreement Breach
• Consent To Judgment
• National Credit Act Compliance
• Condonation Of Procedural Irregularity

Mvenya v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another (46591/2021)

Mvenya v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another (46591/2021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 740 (24 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

46591/2021

Judge

Van Aswegen

The application for leave to appeal does not meet the statutory threshold under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, as the Appellant failed to demonstrate that another court would come to a different conclusion. The grounds of appeal were not clearly articulated in compliance with Rule 49(4), consisting mainly of broad assertions and unsubstantiated criticisms. The Appellant's defences of securitisation, estoppel, and debt risk insurance were speculative, lacked factual support, and were not pleaded with sufficient particularity. The summary judgment order and declaration of execu…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Summary Judgment
• Mortgage Bond Enforcement
• Rule 46a Execution
• Reserve Price Setting
• Locus Standi

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v Absa Bank Limited (028000/2023)

Exxaro Coal Mpumalanga (Pty) Ltd v Absa Bank Limited (028000/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 729 (21 June 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

028000/2023

Judge

Wilson

The court found that, although it disagreed with the reasoning of Justice Lamont, the existence of a prior judgment treating the two demands as one continuous act created a reasonable prospect that another court might reach a different conclusion. This factual issue was material to the outcome, as treating the demands as one would mean Absa Bank's rejection was effective against both, potentially defeating Exxaro Coal's claim. Accordingly, leave to appeal was granted to a Full Court of the division.

Source excerpt

• Demand Guarantee
• Leave To Appeal
• Payment Obligation
• Continuous Demand