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
Decisions matching the current search
Transnet Ltd v The Owner of the Alina II (898/10) [2011] ZASCA 129; 2011 (6) SA 206 (SCA); [2011] 4 All SA 350 (SCA) (15 September 2011)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the vessel owner had already submitted to jurisdiction by defending the in rem action, so attachment was unnecessary.
Transnet Ltd v The Owner of the MV Alina II and Another (AC40/10) [2010] ZAWCHC 503; 2011 (6) SA 40 (WCC) (20 October 2010)
The court held that the applicant's contemplated action in personam was based on the same facts and causes of action as the pending actions in rem, and that the effective defendant in each was the owner of the vessel. Allowing concurrent proceedings in rem and in personam for the same claim would result in unnecessary multiplicity of actions and constitute an abuse of process. Section 3(8) of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act prohibits multiple arrests or attachments for the same maritime claim by the same claimant. Furthermore, the respondent had already submitted to the jurisdiction…
Source excerpt
Rogalla Von Biberstein Investment Company (Pty) Ltd v Green Willows Properties 215 (Pty) Ltd (9400/07) [2009] ZAWCHC 172 (10 November 2009)
The court held that it does not have jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim for the balance of the purchase price of immovable property situated within its area, where the defendant is not resident or present within the jurisdiction and the claim is not secured by hypothecation of the property. The claim is a pure money claim (actio in personam), and the situs of the property is incidental and insufficient to confer jurisdiction. The authorities, including Palm v Simpson and Sonia (Pty) Ltd v Wheeler, establish that jurisdiction for such claims is not based on the location of the property bu…
Source excerpt
Owner of MV "Maritime Prosperity" v Owner of MV "Lash Atlantico" (42/94) [1995] ZASCA 98; 1996 (1) SA 22 (SCA); (15 September 1995)
The court held that section 344(3) of the Merchant Shipping Act applies only to actions in rem, so it did not bar Coastal’s in personam reliance on prescription rules.
Explore more
