South Africa Case Law

Pick n Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd v Cascade Avenue Trading 158 (Pty) Ltd (150/2024)

Pick n Pay Retailers (Pty) Ltd v Cascade Avenue Trading 158 (Pty) Ltd (150/2024) [2024] ZANCHC 18 (26 February 2024)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

150/2024

Judge

Phatshoane

The applicant established urgency due to ongoing commercial loss and risk to its security, and acted promptly in bringing the application. The respondent's payments were appropriately allocated to historical debt in terms of the agreement, and the respondent remained indebted to the applicant. The contractual provisions entitle the applicant to perfect its security under the General Notarial Bond, and court oversight is required for such perfection. The respondent's arguments regarding the punitive nature of perfection and the alleged supplementation of the applicant's case in reply were reje…

Source excerpt

• Notarial Bond Perfection
• Urgent Interdict
• Franchise Agreement Breach
• Allocation Of Payments
• Security Enforcement

Pick and Pay Retailers Proprietary Limited v Kemptongate Foodlane Proprietary Limited and Others (2024-012775)

Pick and Pay Retailers Proprietary Limited v Kemptongate Foodlane Proprietary Limited and Others (2024-012775) [2024] ZAGPJHC 208 (23 February 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024-012775

Judge

N Cassim

The High Court granted urgent relief perfecting general notarial bonds after finding payment default, trading losses, and no sustainable CPA or competition defence.

• General Notarial Bond Perfection
• Parate Execution
• Urgent Interdict
• Allocation Of Payments
• Consumer Protection Act
• Competition Act Defence

Filzo Eneterprises (Pty) Limited and Others v Meyers Hire (Pty) Limited (621/2023)

Filzo Eneterprises (Pty) Limited and Others v Meyers Hire (Pty) Limited (621/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 135 (5 December 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

621/2023

Judge

Govindjee

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against summary judgment, finding no reasonable prospect of success on the liquidated claim and payment-allocation issues.

• Summary Judgment
• Liquidated Claim
• Allocation Of Payments
• Contractual Interpretation
• Summary-judgment
• Liquidated-claims

MVNX (Pty) Ltd v Next 360 (Pty) Ltd and Another (028653/2022)

MVNX (Pty) Ltd v Next 360 (Pty) Ltd and Another (028653/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1500 (6 November 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

028653/2022

Judge

Crutchfield

The High Court granted provisional sentence on an acknowledgment of debt, finding the document liquid, the NCA inapplicable, and the defendants’ payment defence unproven.

• Acknowledgment Of Debt
• Provisional Sentence
• National Credit Act Exclusion
• Liquid Document
• Allocation Of Payments
• Provisional-sentence

Groves (Pty) Ltd v MTE Pumps and Mining Supplies (Pty) Ltd (621/2021)

Groves (Pty) Ltd v MTE Pumps and Mining Supplies (Pty) Ltd (621/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 137 (14 March 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

621/2021

Judge

M.L. Senyatsi

The court dismissed an opposed winding-up application, finding the respondent’s ability to pay was not proved and key payment-allocation disputes remained unresolved.

• Winding Up Of Company
• Commercial Insolvency
• Allocation Of Payments
• Security For Debt
• Winding-up-of-company
• Commercial-insolvency

JL Excavators (Pty) Ltd v C Rock Mining (Pty) Ltd (9347/2020)

JL Excavators (Pty) Ltd v C Rock Mining (Pty) Ltd (9347/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 455 (22 September 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

9347/2020

Judge

Mahon

High Court held that a third party’s payments were not shown to be made on the respondent’s behalf, so the respondent remained liable.

• Company Winding Up
• Payment By Third Party
• Oral Contract
• Allocation Of Payments
• Third-party-payment
• Company-winding-up

ESTA (Pty) Limited v The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (27423/2018)

ESTA (Pty) Limited v The City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality and Others (27423/2018) [2021] ZAGPJHC 636 (1 September 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

27423/2018

Judge

S Yacoob

The High Court ordered Johannesburg municipality to recalculate ESTA’s account, exclude an unsubstantiated pre-2010 balance, and stop treating it as arrears.

• Municipal Services Billing
• Prescription Of Debt
• Meter Readings Dispute
• Allocation Of Payments
• Municipal-services-billing
• Prescription-of-debt

Diesel Electric Services (Pty) Ltd v IRT Projects (Pty) Ltd and Others (15/15095)

Diesel Electric Services (Pty) Ltd v IRT Projects (Pty) Ltd and Others (15/15095) [2019] ZAGPJHC 559 (13 December 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

15/15095

Judge

Windell

The High Court enforced Diesel Electric’s claim for unpaid invoices and upheld the suretyships, but dismissed claims for personal liability and delinquency.

• Suretyship
• Contractual Liability
• Doctrine Of Fictional Fulfilment
• Rectification Of Contract
• Allocation Of Payments
• Contractual-liability

Hudson v Fedbond Nominees (Pty) Ltd (A5070/2017)

Hudson v Fedbond Nominees (Pty) Ltd (A5070/2017) [2019] ZAGPJHC 381 (19 September 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A5070/2017

Judges

U. Bhoola, Carelse, Windell

The High Court upheld Hudson’s appeal, finding the referee’s account materially wrong and holding that the surety debt had been discharged in full.

• Suretyship Liability
• Judgment Debt Discharge
• Expert Referee Report
• In Duplum Rule
• Allocation Of Payments
• Suretyship-liability

Changing Tides 17 Proprietary Limited NO V Bhokoyi and Another (202/2019)

Changing Tides 17 Proprietary Limited NO V Bhokoyi and Another (202/2019) [2019] ZAECPEHC 89 (16 July 2019)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

202/2019

Judge

J W Eksteen

The court found that the defendants had made a substantial advance payment under the loan agreement and that their defence, based on the right to prepay and the proper allocation of payments, raised a triable issue. The interpretation of the contract, particularly regarding prepayment and allocation of payments, is central and requires consideration of all admissible evidence, which is inappropriate for summary judgment proceedings. The defendants' affidavit disclosed a bona fide defence that is good in law, and the plaintiff's claim was not sufficiently clear to warrant summary judgment. Acc…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Loan Agreement
• Prepayment Rights
• Contractual Interpretation
• Allocation Of Payments