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
Singh v South African Reserve Bank (35964/20) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1211 (22 September 2023)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against a judgment upholding the attachment of R40 million, finding no factual basis for the alleged irrationality.
SAR Investment (Pty) Ltd and Others v Standard Bank of South Africa (16344/21) [2023] ZAGPJHC 834 (27 July 2023)
The court found that the applicant failed to disclose a cause of action in its founding papers, as required by South African procedural law. The pleadings did not set out factual averments supporting the relief sought, nor did they clarify the legal basis for the claim against the respondents. The application was premature, as the Reserve Bank's investigation into the transaction was ongoing and no final decision to attach or block the funds had been made. The applicant did not challenge the authority of the Reserve Bank to conduct the investigation, nor did it demonstrate any clear right or…
Source excerpt
Mudzusi Molobela Attorneys and Another v Mokhoantle and Others (040016/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 372 (14 March 2023)
The court discharged a rule nisi attaching bank accounts, finding no valid written contingency fee agreement and no proper cause of action.
T and Another (4081/2013), R v [2017] ZAGPPHC 1251 (12 June 2017)
The High Court held that Standard Bank was a necessary party in an urgent application over attached maintenance funds and struck the matter from the roll for non-joinder.
Nedbank Ltd v P U Injection Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd and Another (686/08) [2009] ZASCA 61; [2009] 4 All SA 334 (SCA) (29 May 2009)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that P U Injection Manufacturing failed to prove any right to funds in a bank account and dismissed its payment claim.
Nurcha Finance Company (Pty) Limited v Sheriff of the High Court, Vryburg and Others (1525/04) [2006] ZANWHC 13 (16 February 2006)
The High Court held that a sheriff’s attachment of contract monies was invalid because the contractor had already ceded the rights to the applicant and Rule 45(8) was not complied with.
Explore more
