Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Balintulo and Others v Mbana (79752/2019) [2025] ZAGPPHC 78 (31 January 2025)
The High Court dismissed an exception to a defamation claim, holding that whether the words were defamatory and referred to the plaintiffs is a trial issue.
Phofung Project Consulting (Pty) Ltd v Standard Bank Of South Africa Ltd (A232/2017) [2018] ZAFSHC 21 (8 March 2018)
The appeal succeeded because the summary judgment application was materially defective. The respondent failed to attach the written agreements forming the basis of its claims to the simple summons, resulting in the summons not disclosing a cause of action. The verifying affidavit could not cure this defect, and the respondent's reliance on Maharaj v Barclays National Bank Ltd was misplaced. Additionally, the claim against the surety was vague and embarrassing due to inconsistencies in the dates and documents referenced. The court a quo erred by focusing on the appellants' alleged technical de…
Source excerpt
Absa Bank Limited v Dolley N.O. and Others (3879/2012) [2015] ZAECPEHC 69 (29 January 2015)
The court found that the applicant's defence regarding the ownership of the debt due to alleged securitization was unsupported by any factual detail, such as the identity of the third party or evidence of cession. The court also held that the verifying affidavit was sufficient as it referenced the causes of action and amounts claimed in the summons, and the relevant documents were attached to the summons. The omission to attach the loan agreement to the summary judgment application was not prejudicial, as the documents were already before the court. Consequently, there were no reasonable pros…
Source excerpt
Absa Bank Ltd v Janse van Rensburg and Another, Absa Bank Ltd v Maree and Another (16071/12, 16815/12) [2012] ZAWCHC 238; 2013 (5) SA 173 (WCC) (24 December 2012)
Although a simple summons is not a pleading for purposes of Uniform Rule 18(6), the weight of authority and longstanding practice in the Western Cape High Court require that, where the plaintiff's cause of action is based on a written agreement, a copy of that agreement must be attached to the simple summons. This requirement is supported by judicial precedent and leading authorities on civil procedure. The attachment of foundational documents ensures that the summons discloses a cause of action and enables both the defendant and the court to understand the basis of the claim, which is partic…
Source excerpt
ABSA Bank Ltd v Studdard and Another (2011/24206) [2012] ZAGPJHC 26 (13 March 2012)
The court held that a simple summons seeking default judgment on a loan claim must attach the written loan agreement and mortgage bond.
Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Gordon and Others (2011/6477) [2011] ZAGPJHC 244 (21 September 2011)
The applicant failed to establish a proper cause of action in the founding affidavit by omitting the loan agreement and first mortgage bond, which were essential to define the debt and the terms of the obligation. The attempt to cure these defects in reply was impermissible, as the founding affidavit must contain all material facts and supporting documents. The applicant also failed to comply with the practice directives set out in Mortinson and Saunderson, which require specific averments and procedural safeguards when seeking execution against immovable property. The court held that these r…
Source excerpt
Sharemax Investments (Pty) Ltd v Basson and Another (27136/10) [2010] ZAGPPHC 176 (4 June 2010)
The High Court held that only specified documents and electronic files fell within an earlier ownership order and could be retained by Sharemax; the rest had to be returned.
Explore more
