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
Highlande Energy (Pty) Ltd and Another v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Others (2025/058512) [2025] ZAGPJHC 452 (8 May 2025)
The court upheld a jurisdictional point in limine and dismissed an urgent application about a company bank account and disputed directorships.
Rasegowa Trading and Projects CC and Another v Beyond Joint Venture (Pty) Ltd and Another (056029/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 681 (11 July 2024)
The High Court confirmed an ex parte interim order after finding that a close corporation member was fraudulently removed and that reconsideration was unwarranted.
Luelle Consulting (Pty) Ltd and Another v Hamann and Another (2023-034510) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1310 (15 November 2023)
Urgent interdict granted to restore access to a company bank account, with the second applicant authorised to litigate for the company under section 165(6) of the Companies Act.
Ethiopian Chruch of Southern Africa and Others v Hash Tag Management and Others (561/2023) [2023] ZAECBHC 27 (14 September 2023)
The High Court granted urgent relief suspending Magistrates’ Court judgments pending appeal and barred interference with church bank accounts.
Motlhasi v Standard Bank of South Africa (5460/22) [2022] ZAGPPHC 488 (4 July 2022)
An executrix sought urgent return of vehicles and access to bank accounts, but the High Court found no spoliation, no ownership, and no basis for urgent interdictory relief.
Babatas Communal Property Association v Lebatlang and Others (957/2019) [2019] ZANCHC 51 (4 October 2019)
The court found that the applicants were validly elected as the executive committee of the Babatas Communal Property Association at the meeting held on 20 January 2018, as confirmed by the MEC and the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. The respondents failed to challenge the endorsement through appeal or review, rendering the decision legally effective. The alleged dispute of fact raised by the respondents was a bare denial without factual foundation and did not preclude final relief. The second applicant was properly authorised to act on behalf of the CPA. The freezing of the C…
Source excerpt
Nelwamondo and Another v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another (768/2015) [2016] ZALMPTHC 9 (15 March 2016)
The court found that paragraph 4 of the final consent order of 25 February 2013 contained a patent error, incorrectly referring to the 'first respondent' instead of the 'second respondent', and that this error was common to both parties. The true intention, as reflected in the interim order and surrounding circumstances, was not to interdict the first applicant from operating the second applicant's bank account. The application was not a variation but a clarification and correction of the order to give effect to the parties' original intention. The court exercised its powers under rule 42(1)…
Source excerpt
Explore more
