Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
1 court collection
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2015] ZAGPPHC 939

Oryx Oil South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Royale Gas (Pty) Ltd and Another (44830/12)

Oryx Oil South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Royale Gas (Pty) Ltd and Another (44830/12) [2015] ZAGPPHC 939 (15 December 2015)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
44830/12
Judge
Hughes

The court held that the applicant's counter-application to vary the interlocutory order to compel was not out of time, as interlocutory orders may be varied before judgment without condonation. The applicant demonstrated good cause for variation by establishing the risk of competitive harm if distributor agreements were disclosed without confidentiality undertakings. The court found that the respondent did not dispute the applicant's allegations of harm and that a balancing of competing rights was required. The court exercised its discretion to allow controlled disclosure, requiring the respo…

Source excerpt

  • Variation Of Interlocutory Order
  • Confidentiality In Discovery
  • Rule 35 Discovery
  • Balancing Of Competing Rights
Read case analysis
Constitutional Law [2014] ZAGPPHC 37

Multichoice (Proprietary) Limited and Others v National Prosecuting Authority and Another (10193/2014)

Multichoice (Proprietary) Limited and Others v National Prosecuting Authority and Another (10193/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 37; [2014] 2 All SA 446 (GP); 2014 (1) SACR 589 (GP) (25 February 2014)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
10193/2014
Judge
Mlambo JP

The court held that the constitutional rights to freedom of expression and open justice must be balanced against the accused's right to a fair trial. Broadcasting of criminal proceedings is permissible, provided adequate safeguards are in place to prevent prejudice to the accused and witnesses. The court found that audio coverage of the entire trial does not pose the same risks as audio-visual coverage and should be allowed. Audio-visual and photographic coverage is permitted for certain portions of the trial, excluding the testimony of the accused and his witnesses, unless they consent. The…

Source excerpt

  • Freedom Of Expression
  • Open Justice Principle
  • Fair Trial Right
  • Broadcasting Of Court Proceedings
  • Section 173 Inherent Powers
  • Balancing Of Competing Rights
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.