South Africa Case Law

Eskom Holdings Soc LTD v Babcock Ntuthuko Engineering (Pty) Ltd (A2023/099598)

Eskom Holdings Soc LTD v Babcock Ntuthuko Engineering (Pty) Ltd (A2023/099598) [2024] ZAGPJHC 990 (3 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2023/099598

Judges

TP Mudau, A Maier-Frawley, A Govender

The High Court held that an adjudicator’s award remained enforceable pending arbitration, dismissed Eskom’s jurisdiction and payment objections, and ordered costs against Eskom.

• Adjudication Enforcement
• Construction Contracts
• Time Bar
• Jurisdiction Of Adjudicator
• Security For Costs
• Adjudication-enforcement

Batalala Construction (Pty) Ltd v Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality Queenstown Eastern Cape and Another (3010/2021)

Batalala Construction (Pty) Ltd v Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality Queenstown Eastern Cape and Another (3010/2021) [2024] ZAECMKHC 11 (25 January 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

3010/2021

Judge

Govindjee

The court found that the 2010 GCC, as incorporated by the SLA and confirmed by the parties' conduct, governed the dispute. The adjudication process was validly invoked, and the municipality participated without raising jurisdictional objections at the relevant time. The adjudicator's determination is binding and enforceable unless and until revised by arbitration or court, and the municipality's notice of dissatisfaction does not suspend its obligation to pay. Prescription does not bar the claim, as the cause of action arose only upon receipt of the adjudication determination. The municipalit…

Source excerpt

• Construction Contracts
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Specific Performance
• Prescription Act
• Arbitration Clauses

Ethekwini Municipality v Cooperativa Muratori and Cementisti - CMC di Ravenna Societa Cooperativa (181/2022)

Ethekwini Municipality v Cooperativa Muratori and Cementisti - CMC di Ravenna Societa Cooperativa (181/2022) [2023] ZASCA 95; 2023 (6) SA 384 (SCA) (12 June 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

181/2022

Judges

Van der Merwe, Mocumie, Matojane, Weiner, Olsen

The SCA held that adjudication decisions under a construction contract were enforceable and that public policy did not justify refusing payment.

• Construction Contracts
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Specific Performance
• Public Policy
• Contractual Discretion
• Construction-contracts

Sedtrade (Pty) Limited v Scarliweb (Pty) Ltd t/a Cooling Solutions Projects and Others (1953/2020)

Sedtrade (Pty) Limited v Scarliweb (Pty) Ltd t/a Cooling Solutions Projects and Others (1953/2020) [2023] ZANCHC 38 (10 March 2023)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1953/2020

Judges

Lever, Nxumalo, Chwaro

High Court appeal dismissed in a construction payment dispute. The court upheld an adjudicator’s decision rejecting penalty deductions and confirmed payment relief.

• Construction Contracts
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Anti Dissipation Orders
• Penalty Deductions
• Urgent Application
• Construction-contracts

Babcock Ntuthuko Engineering (PTY) Ltd t/a Babcock Ntuthuko Powerlince v Eskom Holdings SOC Limited (32783/2021)

Babcock Ntuthuko Engineering (PTY) Ltd t/a Babcock Ntuthuko Powerlince v Eskom Holdings SOC Limited (32783/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 952 (25 November 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

32783/2021

Judge

Makume

The court found that the parties had voluntarily agreed to resolve disputes through adjudication and, if necessary, arbitration under the NEC3 contract. The Adjudicator's decision is binding and enforceable as a contractual obligation unless and until revised by an arbitration tribunal. The Respondent filed a notice of dissatisfaction within the prescribed period but failed to proceed with arbitration, thereby breaching the contract. The Respondent's jurisdictional and substantive defences were considered and rejected, as the Adjudicator had determined all relevant issues, including jurisdict…

Source excerpt

• Contract Rectification
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Specific Performance
• Construction Contracts
• Jurisdictional Challenge
• Interest On Awards

Amanz'Abantu Services Pty Ltd v Coega Development Corporation Pty Ltd (620/2022)

Amanz'Abantu Services Pty Ltd v Coega Development Corporation Pty Ltd (620/2022) [2022] ZAECQBHC 20 (10 August 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

620/2022

Judge

Govindjee

The court held that the adjudicator's determination under the JBCC contract is binding and enforceable for immediate compliance, unless and until revised by arbitration. The respondent's defences of impossibility and set-off were rejected, as no liquidated counterclaim was established and the adjudicator's decision on dispute six did not supersede the other determinations. The respondent failed to refer any aspect of the determination to arbitration or seek clarification, and its preliminary calculations did not constitute a liquidated debt. The court found that the monetary awards and direct…

Source excerpt

• Construction Contracts
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Specific Performance
• Set Off
• Liquidated Claims

Qualelect Investment Holdings (PTY) Ltd v Belo Kies Construction (PTY) Ltd (2021/3529)

Qualelect Investment Holdings (PTY) Ltd v Belo Kies Construction (PTY) Ltd (2021/3529) [2022] ZAGPJHC 430 (22 June 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/3529

Judge

Windell

The High Court enforced an adjudicator’s JBCC determination, finding no clear case of excess jurisdiction or natural justice breach, and ordered payment plus interest.

• Adjudication Enforcement
• Specific Performance
• Construction Contracts
• Jbcc Adjudication Rules
• Natural Justice
• Contractual Entitlement

RMV Engineering Projects (Pty) Ltd v Pro-Serve Consulting (Pty) Ltd (40842/20)

RMV Engineering Projects (Pty) Ltd v Pro-Serve Consulting (Pty) Ltd (40842/20) [2021] ZAGPPHC 791 (19 November 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

40842/20

Judge

JF Barnardt

The court found that the adjudicator's determination, although delivered after the contractual four-week period, is valid and enforceable as a matter of contractual obligation. The contract did not expressly make time of the essence or provide that late determinations are invalid. The respondent failed to notify dissatisfaction or refer the dispute to the tribunal as required by the contract. The determination was sufficiently reasoned and complied with the agreement. The respondent is liable to pay the awarded amount and interest as per the adjudicator's determination. Costs are awarded to t…

Source excerpt

• Adjudication Enforcement
• Construction Contracts
• Contractual Dispute Resolution
• Late Award Validity
• Interest On Awards

Framatome v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd (357/2021)

Framatome v Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd (357/2021) [2021] ZASCA 132; 2022 (2) SA 395 (SCA) (1 October 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

357/2021

Judges

Mathopo, Molemela, Makgoka, Mbatha, Mothle

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the adjudicator's Decision 11 is binding and enforceable until set aside by arbitration. Eskom failed to challenge Decision 7 in time and participated in the adjudication process, waiving jurisdictional objections. The adjudicator acted within his jurisdiction, deciding the dispute as referred by the parties, and the contractor's quotation was properly deemed accepted under the contract. The High Court erred by refusing enforcement and introducing subjective discretion. The purpose of adjudication is to provide a speedy, interim resolution of disputes and…

Source excerpt

• Construction Contracts
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Compensation Events
• Interim Payments

Scarliweb (Pty) Ltd t/a Cooling Solutions Projects and Another v Sedtrade (Pty) Ltd (Reg No: 2004/014721/07) and Others (1953/2020)

Scarliweb (Pty) Ltd t/a Cooling Solutions Projects and Another v Sedtrade (Pty) Ltd (Reg No: 2004/014721/07) and Others (1953/2020) [2021] ZANCHC 40 (30 July 2021)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1953/2020

Judge

Mamosebo

The court confirmed a rule nisi and held that an adjudicator’s decision under a subcontract was binding and enforceable, ordering Sedtrade to pay the applicants.

• Interdict
• Subcontractor Payment
• Adjudication Enforcement
• Urgent Application
• Contractual Penalties
• Adjudication-enforcement