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
Paul v ER Consulting Incorporated and Another (22932/2014) [2018] ZAGPPHC 827 (17 October 2018)
The High Court held that the plaintiff’s damages claim was prescribed because he had the necessary facts and debtor identity by 26 March 2011.
Symes N.O and Another v Stuart Van der Merwe Inc and Others (24400/2015) [2018] ZAGPPHC 885 (17 May 2018)
Prescription did not commence the day after the payments were made, as the plaintiffs only became aware of the payments and the identity of the debtor after conducting the insolvency enquiry on 13 March 2014. Section 12(3) of the Prescription Act requires actual or deemed knowledge before prescription begins. Furthermore, civil proceedings were suspended until the appointment of the liquidators on 3 August 2013, so prescription could not run before that date. The defendants' argument that prescription began immediately after payment is incorrect, as it disregards the statutory requirements fo…
Source excerpt
Mettle Development Finance One (Pty) Ltd v Calgro M3 Developments (Pty) Ltd (A5005/2014, 40945/2011) [2015] ZAGPJHC 161 (6 July 2015)
The High Court held that prescription began when the debt became due, not when demand was later made, and upheld the appeal, dismissing the respondent’s claim.
Mavuso v MEC for the Department of Health, Mpumalanga (67610/2012) [2014] ZAGPPHC 863 (31 October 2014)
The court found that the defendant failed to prove that the plaintiff's claim had prescribed. There was no evidence that the plaintiff, at the time of discharge or during follow-up visits, had knowledge of any facts indicating negligent treatment. The hospital records reflected successful surgery, and pain experienced post-operation did not, on its own, alert the plaintiff to a possible cause of action. The plaintiff, with limited education and no medical expertise, could not reasonably have acquired the necessary knowledge before receiving Dr. Booyse's report on 14 August 2012. The report pr…
Source excerpt
Botha v Williams and Others (22523/2010) [2012] ZAGPJHC 52 (2 March 2012)
High Court held that a deceased estate could not be charged with knowledge before an executor was appointed, so prescription began only on appointment.
Anglorand Securities Ltd v Mudau and another (125/10) [2011] ZASCA 76 (26 May 2011)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the plaintiff’s claim had prescribed and that no acknowledgment of liability interrupted prescription.
Bonfiglio v ATB Chartered Accountants (SA) (20762/2006) [2009] ZAGPPHC 90 (19 June 2009)
The court found that the cause of action for damages against the defendant only became complete when the plaintiff suffered actual loss, which was established upon receipt of the nulla bona return after execution against Mr Raath failed. Prior to this, the plaintiff could not have known with certainty that she had suffered damages or that Mr Raath would not pay. The defendant's own correspondence confirmed that any action against it before the nulla bona return would have been premature. Therefore, prescription only commenced on 8 July 2003, the date of the nulla bona return, and the plaintif…
Source excerpt
Lavers v Hein & Far BK (240/96) [1998] ZASCA 19; 1998 (3) SA 195 (SCA); (25 March 1998)
The court held that prescription began when the respondent was told the seized vehicle had been identified as stolen and would not be returned.
Explore more
