Esheria South Africa Case Law
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

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family And Children [2022] ZASCA 116

MJ K v II K (360/2021)

MJ K v II K (360/2021) [2022] ZASCA 116; 2023 (2) SA 158 (SCA) (28 July 2022)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
360/2021
Judges
Zondi, Schippers, Mabindla-Boqwana, Matojane, Smith

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent failed to establish any fraudulent or dishonest purpose in the creation or management of the trusts and close corporation. The trusts and close corporation were formed for legitimate estate planning and asset protection purposes, and the evidence did not support the contention that they were the appellant's alter ego or that their assets should be included in the accrual calculation. The High Court erred by straying beyond the issues defined in the pleadings and by finding that the appellant acted with improper motive. The legal basis for p…

Source excerpt

  • Accrual System
  • Trust Veil Piercing
  • Matrimonial Property Act
  • Alter Ego
  • Redistribution Order
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2021] ZAGPPHC 480

Martin's funerals Franschising (Pty) Ltd v Martins Funerals Pretoria City CC and Another (A187/19)

Martin's funerals Franschising (Pty) Ltd v Martins Funerals Pretoria City CC and Another (A187/19) [2021] ZAGPPHC 480 (29 July 2021)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A187/19
Judges
Makhoba, Mogotsi, Baqwa

The appeal succeeded because the court found that both respondents were parties to the franchise agreement, with the second respondent signing on behalf of the first respondent. The appellant properly pleaded its case in the founding affidavit, referring to both respondents as bound by the contract and as acting together in the business. The court a quo erred in finding that the first respondent was not a signatory and in embarking on an alter ego enquiry, which was unnecessary. The misdirection by the court a quo in its interpretation of the pleadings and the law regarding alter ego and cont…

Source excerpt

  • Franchise Agreement
  • Alter Ego
  • Contractual Liability
  • Pleading Requirements
  • Intellectual Property Interdict
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.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.