Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2024] ZAGPPHC 1203

Niemand v Hollard Insurance Company Limited (13691/2021)

Niemand v Hollard Insurance Company Limited (13691/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1203 (22 November 2024)

The High Court dismissed leave to appeal, finding no good prospects of success and holding that the respondent was entitled to honour the guarantees.

  • Suretyship
  • Indemnity
  • Advance Payment Guarantee
  • Performance Guarantee
  • Leave To Appeal
  • Leave-to-appeal
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2018] ZAGPJHC 569

Teichmann Structures (Pty) Ltd v Hollard Insurance Company Ltd and Another (24233/18)

Teichmann Structures (Pty) Ltd v Hollard Insurance Company Ltd and Another (24233/18) [2018] ZAGPJHC 569 (19 October 2018)

The applicant failed to prove that the outstanding amount of R2,129,876.62 was unrelated to the Advance Payment Guarantee and instead linked to an unsecured loan. The documents relied upon by the applicant, including IPC 13 and De Waal's email, did not support its version when read in context. The evidence showed that all advance payments were treated the same and recouped under the contract, with no distinction between secured and unsecured advances. The applicant's reliance on selective documentation and failure to provide proof of implementation of IPC 13 undermined its case. The court fou…

  • Performance Guarantee
  • Advance Payment Guarantee
  • Fraudulent Claim
  • Motion Proceedings
  • Interim Relief
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2012] ZAGPJHC 101

Basil Read (Pty) Ltd v Nedbank Ltd and Another (8283/12)

Basil Read (Pty) Ltd v Nedbank Ltd and Another (8283/12) [2012] ZAGPJHC 101; 2012 (6) SA 514 (GSJ) (13 April 2012)

The court found that the applicant failed to join the opposing party and did not provide for service of the application or order, despite the order directly affecting the opposing party's rights. The applicant's attempt to supplement its founding affidavit was refused, as the authorities do not permit supplementation in a Rule 6(12)(c) reconsideration by the applicant. The court held that the advance payment guarantees created independent contractual obligations for the bank to pay the beneficiary, and that disputes between the applicant's subsidiary and the opposing party were irrelevant to…

  • Interim Interdict
  • Documentary Credit
  • Advance Payment Guarantee
  • Rule 6 12 C
  • Joinder Of Parties
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.