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
Fourie NO and Others v Firstrand Bank Limited t/a First National Bank (1886/2019) [2020] ZAFSHC 232 (22 October 2020)
The High Court dismissed an application to rescind a settlement order, finding the promissory note non-compliant with the Bills of Exchange Act and no basis for rescission.
Nedbank Limited v Principle Education and Marketing CC and Another (11810/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 430 (13 June 2016)
The court found that the corporation failed to raise any bona fide defence to Nedbank's claims. The alleged promissory note was neither produced nor substantiated, and the assertion that the agreement itself constituted a negotiable instrument was rejected as nonsensical. The corporation admitted liability but claimed payment was tendered by way of a promissory note, which was not supported by any credible evidence. The court held that the procedural requirements for summary judgment were met, that the agreement was validly cancelled, and that Nedbank was entitled to repossession of the vehic…
Source excerpt
Vela v Rainbow Shuttle Services CC and Another (26955/14) [2014] ZAGPJHC 359 (3 December 2014)
The court found that the acknowledgment of debt signed by the defendants met all the requirements of Section 87 of the Bills of Exchange Act and thus constituted a promissory note. However, the plaintiff failed to produce the original liquid document as required by the practice manual and did not provide a satisfactory explanation for its absence. The court was not placed in a position to exercise its discretion to condone non-production, as no evidence was presented as to why the original was unavailable. The plain interpretation of Section 68 of the Act prohibits the granting of provisional…
Source excerpt
Kirsten and Thomson CC t/a Nashua, East London v Commissioner for South African Revenue Services and Another (1681/08) [2013] ZAGPPHC 74 (6 March 2013)
The High Court dismissed a VAT enrichment claim based on a cloned cheque, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove condictio indebiti.
CHHC Trading (Pty) Limited v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another (5278/2007) [2011] ZAGPJHC 47 (20 May 2011)
High Court dismissal of claims over a fraudulent cheque transaction, holding that ownership passed to the fraudster and the plaintiff failed to prove bank liability or causation.
Brick on Brick Property Investments 23 (Pty) Ltd v Cawood (53224/09) [2010] ZAGPPHC 597 (19 March 2010)
Summary judgment was refused where the defendant showed a triable defence based on the plaintiff’s knowledge that it was dealing with a company and on a disputed condition.
Ngcai v Minister Of Finance and Another (46640/09) [2009] ZAGPPHC 362 (11 December 2009)
The High Court dismissed a provisional sentence claim based on a purported promissory note, finding it was not a liquid document and that the plaintiff lacked locus standi.
BCE Foodservice Equipment (Pty) Ltd v Constantaras (6736/05) [2009] ZAGPJHC 57 (15 October 2009)
The court held that the defendant's proposed amendment to his plea, which sought to introduce lack of knowledge as a defence to personal liability under section 23(2) of the Close Corporations Act, was not sustainable. The defendant himself signed and issued the cheques, and his lack of knowledge regarding compliance with statutory requirements did not absolve him of liability. The court distinguished the Stafford case, finding it inapplicable to the present facts. Regarding the plaintiff's exception to the defendant's amended plea, the court found that the exception was based on a misunderst…
Source excerpt
African Bank Limited t/a ab Commerce v Covmark Marketing cc t/a Covmark Marketing and Others (9238/2005, 10785/2005) [2008] ZAKZHC 36; 2008 (6) SA 46 (D) (4 April 2008)
The court considered whether African Bank was a holder in due course of three post-dated cheques and whether special endorsements made them irregular under the Bills of Exchange Act.
Wypkema v Lubbe (138/06) [2007] ZASCA 36; [2007] 4 All SA 1224 (SCA); 2007 (5) SA 138 (SCA) (28 March 2007)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that an attorney who draws a cheque on a trust account acts as principal, not as agent, and is personally liable on the cheque.
Explore more
