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 [2021] ZASCA 15

Monteiro and Another v Diedricks (1199/2019)

Monteiro and Another v Diedricks (1199/2019) [2021] ZASCA 15; 2021 (3) SA 482 (SCA); [2021] 2 All SA 405 (SCA) (2 March 2021)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
1199/2019
Judges
Dambuza, Schippers, Plasket, Goosen, Mabindla-Boqwana

The majority held that the mandament van spolie is a possessory remedy requiring restoration of possession by the party who committed the dispossession. However, an order for restoration cannot be granted where the party is no longer in possession and compliance is impossible. In this case, neither Autoglen nor Monteiro were in possession of the BMW motor vehicle at the time the order was sought, as it had been sold and delivered to a third party by Street Talk Trading. The high court's order requiring restoration was thus not capable of being carried into effect and was set aside. The majori…

Source excerpt

  • Mandament Van Spolie
  • Restoration Of Possession
  • Co Spoliator Liability
  • Specific Performance
  • Rule Of Law
  • Urgent Application
Read case analysis
Land And Property [1989] ZASCA 167

Administrator of Cape of Good Hope and Another v Ntshwaqela and Others (165/89)

Administrator of Cape of Good Hope and Another v Ntshwaqela and Others (165/89) [1989] ZASCA 167; [1990] 2 All SA 34 (A) (30 November 1989)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
165/89
Judges
CORBETT CJ, HOEXTER JA, NESTADT JA, STEYN JA, NICHOLAS AJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the order granted by the court a quo was a simple mandament van spolie, not a transportation order. The CPA and SAP were found to be co-spoliators with the owners, having participated in a coordinated operation that resulted in the forcible dispossession of the applicants. The court rejected the argument that a spoliation order could only be granted against those who acquired possession, holding that the rationale of the mandament van spolie is to prevent self-help and restore possession, regardless of whether the spoliator acquired possession. The imposs…

Source excerpt

  • Mandament Van Spolie
  • Co Spoliator Liability
  • Restoration Of Possession
  • Impossibility Of Performance
  • Squatters Removal
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.