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
Kistnasamy and Others v Pillay and Another (D5841/2023) [2024] ZAKZDHC 31 (24 May 2024)
The court held that an oral sub-lease was cancelled and ordered the respondent to vacate business premises in Amanzimtoti after non-payment of rent.
HI-Q Automotive (Pty) Ltd v Erga Investments (Pty) Ltd (2024-011267) [2024] ZAGPJHC 160 (21 February 2024)
Urgent eviction application granted after the respondent defaulted on rent and remained in occupation after cancellation of the sub-lease.
Domel v Khumalo and Another (2020-34517) [2024] ZAGPJHC 164 (19 February 2024)
The High Court granted eviction after finding no proved option to buy, sustained non-payment of rent and charges, and a properly cancelled lease.
Pienaar t/a KTS Boerdery v Pienaar and Others (40/2016) [2017] ZANWHC 50 (29 June 2017)
The court found an oral lease existed between family members, confirmed its cancellation, and awarded R96,000 arrear rental plus interest.
Kruger v Molefe and Another (67228/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 478 (5 June 2015)
The court granted eviction after finding the applicant proved ownership, while the respondent’s competing ownership claim was unsupported and inconsistent.
Ditsong Museums of South Africa v Fundi Projects (Pty) Ltd and Others (76939/2013) [2014] ZAGPPHC 914 (5 November 2014)
The court postponed an eviction dispute for oral evidence, finding factual disputes over ownership, lease validity, and cancellation could not be resolved on affidavit.
SA Taxi Securitisation (Pty) Ltd v Chesane (26382/2009) [2010] ZAGPJHC 30; 2010 (6) SA 557 (GSJ) (1 April 2010)
The High Court granted interim attachment of two leased taxis pending trial, holding that the National Credit Act did not abolish the common-law remedy.
Palace Shareblock Ltd v Lavender Moon Trading 157 CC t/a the Copper Chimney (2088/2008) [2009] ZAKZDHC 41 (2 September 2009)
The respondent admitted to late payment of rental but argued that confusion caused by the applicant regarding the cession of rights excused the breach. The court found that the respondent was not misled by the applicant and that the lease agreement clearly stipulated the time, amount, and place for payment. The respondent was expected to continue paying rental to Inner Anchorage until advised otherwise in writing. The respondent's failure to pay rental on due dates constituted a material breach of the lease agreement, entitling the applicant to cancel the lease and seek eviction. The court fo…
Source excerpt
Explore more
