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
St Benedict's Abbey NPO v Eskom Holdings SOC Limited (2025/096450) [2025] ZALMPPHC 129 (2 July 2025)
The High Court dismissed an urgent bid to stop Eskom from disconnecting electricity, finding the applicant had not met the test for an interim interdict.
Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Snyman De Jager Attorneys and Another (2025/087641) [2025] ZAGPJHC 624 (24 June 2025)
The court found that the applicant, as a sequestrating creditor with a substantial claim against the second respondent, had established a prima facie right to seek preservation of the net proceeds from the sale of the Midstream property. The second respondent's financial distress, refusal to provide assurances, and lack of disclosure regarding her assets gave rise to a legitimate apprehension that the proceeds would be dissipated to the prejudice of creditors. The requirements for an interim interdict were satisfied: the applicant demonstrated a prima facie right, irreparable harm if the proc…
Source excerpt
Small v Centurion Country Club (Pty) Ltd and Another (133295/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 520 (29 May 2025)
The applicant established a prima facie right to protection from unreasonable risk posed by the design of the 12th hole as a par 5. Photographic and factual evidence demonstrated that the risk of bodily injury and property damage was real and not merely speculative. The respondent's statistics did not negate the applicant's reasonable apprehension of harm, especially given the history of incidents and the flawed design acknowledged by the respondent. The balance of convenience favoured the applicant, as the interim relief would prevent further harm pending final determination. There was no ad…
Source excerpt
Heat It Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd v Michaelides (052785/2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 563 (22 May 2025)
The court found that, although the respondent denied ongoing possession of the applicant's confidential drawings, it was clear that he had possession of electronic copies at the time the application was launched. The respondent subsequently deleted these files but did not comply with the applicant's demand for their return. The applicant established a clear right to the drawings, which were confidential and critical to its business operations. The balance of convenience favoured the applicant, as disclosure or misuse of the information would cause irreparable harm and could not be adequately…
Source excerpt
Davis and Deale Irrigation (Pty) Ltd and Another v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan and Others (2023-071369) [2025] ZAGPJHC 475 (19 May 2025)
The High Court dismissed an interim interdict against a municipal water-meter contract award, finding no proven fraud, no imminent irreparable harm, and an adequate damages remedy.
Conpack Building & Civils (Pty) Ltd V University of the Western Cape and Another (014117/25) [2025] ZAWCHC 90 (7 March 2025)
The court refused an interim interdict stopping a university refurbishment pending review, holding that the tender was already implemented and the applicant had not shown a prima facie right or irreparable harm.
Bliss Brands (Pty) Ltd v Colgate Palmolive (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/095598) [2025] ZAGPJHC 654 (28 February 2025)
Appeal dismissed against an enforcement order under section 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act, after the court found exceptional circumstances and irreparable harm.
SA Taxi Development Finance (Pty) Limited v Johnson (2021/0031) [2025] ZAGPJHC 181 (24 February 2025)
The applicant established a clear right to the vehicle by virtue of the lease agreement and payment for the vehicle, with ownership retained until full payment. The agreement was validly cancelled due to non-payment, which is undisputed. The respondent failed to provide evidence disputing the outstanding balance or ownership and relied solely on technical defences of jurisdiction and locus standi, which the court found unsustainable. The requirements for interim interdict—prima facie right, irreparable harm, balance of convenience, and absence of alternative remedy—were all satisfied. The res…
Source excerpt
K.G v D.G and Others (B957/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 130 (17 February 2025)
The applicant established a prima facie right to the property based on the settlement agreement and the Rule 43 court order, both of which support her claim to the property pending the divorce. The urgency of the application was justified, as the applicant sought compliance before launching proceedings and acted promptly upon learning of the sale agreement. The respondent's financial arguments were found to be unconvincing, given his substantial income and prior findings of contempt. The sale of the property would irreparably harm the applicant by rendering her claim and any future judgment m…
Source excerpt
SMD Technologies (Pty) Ltd v Tavares and Another (118592/24) [2024] ZALCJHB 546 (13 December 2024)
The court found that the applicant established a clear right to enforce the restraint of trade agreement, as the first respondent had access to confidential information and trade connections, and her employment with a direct competitor posed a real risk to the applicant's interests. The first respondent failed to discharge the onus of proving that the restraint was unreasonable in duration or territorial scope, nor did she demonstrate that enforcement would render her economically inactive or unproductive. The court held that public policy and constitutional considerations did not outweigh th…
Source excerpt
Explore more
