National Director of Public Prosecutions v Victor N.O and Others (756/2023) [2025] ZASCA 31; 2025 (1) SACR 561 (SCA) (31 March 2025)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
756/2023
Judges
Mbatha, Hughes, Meyer, Matojane, Koen
The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed the NDPP’s application to reinstate a lapsed appeal about POCA-preserved funds now held in insolvency administration.
Koopkrag (Pty) Ltd v Taute, Bouwer and Cilliers Inc and Others (A166/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 165 (14 February 2025)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A166/2024
Judges
Yende AJ, Labuschagne J, Mazibuko AJ
The Full Court held that the sheriff failed to comply with the procedural requirements by not notifying Koopkrag, the title holder, of the date of the auction as required by Rule 42(2) of the Magistrates' Courts Rules. The motor vehicle, being subject to an instalment sale agreement, was not susceptible to attachment under the landlord's tacit hypothec in terms of section 2(1)(b) of the Security by Means of Movable Property Act. The deprivation of Koopkrag's property without proper notice constituted arbitrary deprivation under section 25 of the Constitution. The sale in execution was therefo…
Govan Mbeki Local Municipality v Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others; Emalahleni Local Municipality v Glencore Operations South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Others (CCT 189/22; CCT 191/22) [2024] ZACC 25; 2025 (2) BCLR 111 (CC); 2025 (2) SA 238 (CC) (19 November 2024)
The Constitutional Court held that the impugned by-laws, which imposed transfer embargoes as enforcement mechanisms for municipal planning and building regulation, were inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid. The Court found no constitutional or legislative source for the power of municipalities to make by-laws regulating deeds registration and property transfer beyond the scope contemplated by section 53 of SPLUMA and section 118(1) of the Systems Act. The by-laws unlawfully encroached on the national competence over deeds registration, and their operation conflicted with the statuto…
Gadiah and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions (8752/22D) [2024] ZAKZDHC 65; 2025 (1) SACR 81 (KZD) (23 September 2024)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
8752/22D
Judge
Davis AJ
The applicants participated in an unlawful multiplication scheme operated by Manci, promising returns far exceeding lawful interest rates. Their invested funds were used as instrumentality of the offence. Although the applicants claim to be victims and deny knowledge of illegality, the extraordinary returns and their conduct raise a clear factual dispute regarding their knowledge. Motion proceedings are ill-suited to resolve such disputes, and neither party sought referral to oral evidence. On the common cause facts, the applicants have not established grounds for variation of the forfeiture…
National Director of Public Prosecutions v Mthombeni and Others (1188/2024) [2024] ZANWHC 209 (5 August 2024)
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Case number
1188/2024
Judge
M Z Makoti
The court found that section 26 of POCA expressly authorises the NDPP to seek ex parte restraint orders over realisable property pending criminal prosecution. The Respondents' arguments regarding section 17 of POCA were misplaced, as that section deals with the conclusion of criminal proceedings, not the requirements for restraint orders. The NDPP was not required to prove the Respondents' guilt at this stage, only that there were reasonable grounds for believing a confiscation order may be made. The court held that the NDPP did not abuse its authority, as the previous decisions not to prosec…
The Supreme Court of Appeal assumed, without deciding, that the appellant's prospective right to inherit under his former spouse's will could constitute property for the purposes of section 25 of the Constitution. The Court held that section 2B of the Wills Act does not amount to arbitrary deprivation of property, as it serves a legitimate legislative purpose: protecting testators from unintentionally benefiting former spouses in the immediate aftermath of divorce. The limitation restricting evidence of testamentary intention to the will itself is justified by the need for certainty and to pr…
Constantia Insurance Company Limited v The Master of the High Court, Johannesburg and Others (512/2021) [2022] ZASCA 179; 2023 (5) SA 88 (SCA) (13 December 2022)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
512/2021
Judges
Van der Merwe, Plasket, Basson
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the indemnity provided by Protech Investments to Constantia constituted indirect financial assistance to a related company, Protech Khuthele, within the meaning of section 45(1)(a) of the Companies Act. The board of Protech Investments did not adopt a resolution authorising the indemnity nor did it satisfy itself of the solvency, liquidity, and fairness requirements as required by section 45(3)(b). The only resolution produced was by Protech Holdings, which did not suffice. The requirements not met were substantive, not merely formal or procedural, so sec…
Morganambal Mannaru and another v Robert MacLennan-Smith and others (271/2021) [2022] ZASCA 137; 2023 (2) SA 150 (SCA) (24 October 2022)
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
271/2021
Judges
Van der Merwe, Mothle, Mabindla-Boqwana, Molefe, Masipa
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the right of way servitude must be exercised in accordance with the civiliter modo principle, requiring a reasonable balancing of the rights of the dominant and servient owners. The erection of a gate across the servitude road, in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, is permissible provided it does not unreasonably interfere with the servient owner's rights. The high court correctly weighed the security concerns of the respondents against the appellants' access rights, ensuring that the appellants retained reasonable access to the servitude area.…
Agnes and Another v Tobeka and Others (42040/2018) [2022] ZAGPJHC 814 (19 October 2022)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
42040/2018
Judge
Thupaatlase
The court found that the applicants were deprived of their residential property without judicial process, in violation of constitutional protections under Sections 25 and 26. The initial foreclosure and sale by BOE Bank in 2001 was conducted extra-judicially, without any evidence of court proceedings or oversight. As a result, all subsequent sales and transfers of the property were tainted with illegality and declared void ab initio. The court held that even bona fide purchasers cannot acquire valid title where the original sale was a nullity. The Registrar of Deeds was ordered to cancel all…
