South Africa Case Law

Chess South Africa v South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee and Another.rtf (62189/2023)

Chess South Africa v South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee and Another.rtf (62189/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 601 (25 June 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

62189/2023

Judge

Swanepoel

The High Court held that Sascoc’s suspension decisions were reviewable under PAJA and procedurally unfair, but dismissed Chess SA’s case for lack of authority.

• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Procedural Fairness
• Review Of Administrative Action
• Standing And Authority
• Bias And Ulterior Motive
• Administrative-law

Van Zyl v Master of the High Court, Western Cape Division, Cape Town and Another (16839/2018)

Van Zyl v Master of the High Court, Western Cape Division, Cape Town and Another (16839/2018) [2020] ZAWCHC 30 (30 April 2020)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16839/2018

Judge

Binns-Ward

The High Court reviewed and set aside a Deputy Master’s findings of misconduct against a liquidator, holding they were legally flawed and unsupported.

• Judicial Review Under Paja
• Liquidator Misconduct
• Fiduciary Duties Of Liquidators
• Procedural Fairness
• Companies Act Liquidation
• Bias And Ulterior Motive

Simelane NO and Others v Seven-Eleven Corporation SA (Pty) Ltd and Another (480/01)

Simelane NO and Others v Seven-Eleven Corporation SA (Pty) Ltd and Another (480/01) [2002] ZASCA 141; [2001-2002] CPLR 13 (SCA) ; [2003] 1 All SA 82 (SCA); 2003 (3) SA 64 (SCA) (26 November 2002)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

480/01

Judges

Schutz, Hefer, Harms, Scott, Brand

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the Competition Commission's referral of complaints to the Tribunal is an investigative act, not a determinative administrative decision affecting Seven-Eleven's rights. Accordingly, it is not subject to review except in cases of ill-faith, oppression, or vexation, none of which were established. The Commission was not required to observe the audi alteram partem rule at the investigative stage, having provided Seven-Eleven with the 'gist' of the case and an opportunity to be heard, which Seven-Eleven declined to fully utilize. Allegations of bias, malice,…

Source excerpt

• Competition Act
• Administrative Review
• Audi Alteram Partem
• Investigative Vs Adjudicative Function
• Referral Of Complaints
• Bias And Ulterior Motive