South Africa Case Law

Eagle Two Property Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v City of Johannesburg (A5034/21)

Eagle Two Property Investments (Pty) Ltd and Another v City of Johannesburg (A5034/21) [2024] ZAGPJHC 670 (24 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A5034/21

Judge

C Todd

The High Court removed the matter from the roll, allowing the City of Johannesburg 10 days to file answering papers and a condonation application, with attorney-and-client costs.

• Settlement Agreement
• Authority Of Legal Representatives
• Rescission Application
• Punitive Costs
• Postponement Of Proceedings
• Settlement-agreement

Mangqobe and Others v Mangqobe N.O (3027/2021)

Mangqobe and Others v Mangqobe N.O (3027/2021) [2024] ZAECMHC 10 (23 January 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

3027/2021

Judge

M.S. Jolwana

The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a consent order, finding no proper basis under Rule 42 or common law and no proof the order was made in error.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Consent Orders
• Authority Of Legal Representatives
• Rule 42 Uniform Rules
• Locus Standi
• Rescission-of-judgment

Denby v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (27338/2017)

Denby v Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (27338/2017) [2020] ZAGPJHC 213; 2021 (1) SA 190 (GJ) (9 September 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

27338/2017

Judge

Gilbert AJ

The court held that, in the absence of express instructions to the contrary, legal representatives have authority to make admissions, concessions, and even settle matters during pre-trial proceedings, particularly under Rule 37. The defendant's legal representatives, acting in good faith and having constructively engaged with the plaintiff's representatives, reached agreement on the quantification of damages and jointly sought an order. The absence of express authorisation from the defendant did not preclude the court from granting the order, as the representatives' actions were within the sc…

Source excerpt

• Authority Of Legal Representatives
• Settlement Agreements
• Rule 37 Conferences
• Municipal Liability
• Quantification Of Damages

Minister of Police v van der Watt and Another (14511/2013)

Minister of Police v van der Watt and Another (14511/2013) [2017] ZAGPPHC 920 (14 December 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

14511/2013

Judge

C J van der Westhuizen

The High Court dismissed the Minister of Police’s application to rescind two agreed court orders, holding that Rule 42(1) and iustus error were not established.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Authority Of Legal Representatives
• Unlawful Arrest
• Damages
• Rule 42 Uniform Rules
• Iustus Error

Democratic Alliance v Motsoeneng and Others (18107/16)

Democratic Alliance v Motsoeneng and Others (18107/16) [2017] ZAWCHC 5 (7 February 2017)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

18107/16

Judges

Le Grange, Rogers

The court found that the SABC's decision to appoint Motsoeneng as GECA was indeed an exercise of public power and therefore subject to legality review. The arguments advanced by the SABC did not demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different conclusion. The court's analysis was supported by Constitutional Court judgments, particularly Khumalo, which confirmed that such appointments by public bodies are reviewable. The challenge to the authority of Ncube Incorporated Attorneys was dismissed, as sufficient evidence of authority was provided. The personal costs order…

Source excerpt

• Principle Of Legality
• Public Power Exercise
• Costs Orders
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Authority Of Legal Representatives

Britz and Others v Matloga and Others (21653/2011)

Britz and Others v Matloga and Others (21653/2011) [2015] ZAGPPHC 171 (25 March 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

21653/2011

Judge

N V Khumalo

The High Court refused rescission of a consent order, finding the applicants had authorized their attorneys to settle and failed to show iustus error or lack of mandate.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Authority Of Legal Representatives
• Alienation Of Land Act
• Consent Orders
• Mandate Of Attorney
• Rescission-of-judgment

Hlongwane v Cisco Systems South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another (J486/107)

Hlongwane v Cisco Systems South Africa (Pty) Ltd and Another (J486/107) [2010] ZALCJHB 368 (16 September 2010)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J486/07

Judge

Molahlehi

The Labour Court held that an oral settlement concluded by the applicant’s lawyers was binding, and dismissed his claim with costs.

• Authority Of Legal Representatives
• Settlement Agreements
• Protected Disclosure
• Termination Of Employment
• Settlement-agreements
• Authority-of-legal-representatives