South Africa Case Law

Kommandantsdrift v Brits and Others (5171/2015 ; 4070/2015)

Kommandantsdrift v Brits and Others (5171/2015 ; 4070/2015) [2025] ZAWCHC 94 (13 January 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

5171/2015 ; 4070/2015

Judge

Nuku

The court found that all parties laboured under a common mistake regarding the subject matter of the transfers, believing they were dealing only with Micheal's Farm rather than the consolidated property. This mistake vitiated the real agreement required for valid transfer of ownership under the abstract system. There was no evidence that the transferors or transferees intended to transfer or acquire ownership of the property as registered. Consequently, the transfers were void, and the plaintiff is entitled to rectification of the Deeds Office records and to be declared the rightful owner of…

Source excerpt

• Abstract System Of Transfer
• Rectification Of Deeds
• Common Mistake
• Ownership Transfer
• Real Agreement

Road Accident Fund v Moiloa (5370/2022)

Road Accident Fund v Moiloa (5370/2022) [2024] ZAFSHC 345 (31 October 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

5370/2022

Judge

T.L. Manye

The court found that the Applicant failed to establish the existence of a common mistake between the parties as required by Rule 42(1)(c). The alleged error was unilateral, arising solely from the Applicant and its attorneys, and did not vitiate the settlement agreement. The Applicant did not raise prescription or statutory non-compliance in its Plea, nor did it demonstrate that the orders were erroneously sought or granted. The Respondent reasonably relied on the consensus reached, and the procedural requirements for rescission were not met. Consequently, the application for rescission was d…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Rule 42
• Settlement Agreement
• Common Mistake
• Writ Of Execution

South African Municipal Workers Union National Provident Fund v Tlokwe Local Municipality and Others (A129/22)

South African Municipal Workers Union National Provident Fund v Tlokwe Local Municipality and Others (A129/22) [2024] ZAGPPHC 748 (29 July 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A129/22

Judges

E van der Schyff, M Mabesele, M Moleleki

Appeal dismissed against refusal to vary a consent order under Rule 42(1)(c) for alleged common mistake about the Fund’s tax status.

• Variation Of Court Orders
• Common Mistake
• Income Tax Act
• Pension Funds Act
• Motion Proceedings
• Rule-42-variation

FNB v Govsons Investment (7057/21; 22035/15)

FNB v Govsons Investment (7057/21; 22035/15) [2024] ZAGPPHC 23 (15 January 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

7057/21; 22035/15

Judge

K Strydom

The court dismissed two unopposed applications to vary earlier orders under Rule 42(1), finding no proven error, ambiguity, or common mistake.

• Rule 42 Variation
• Default Judgment
• Common Mistake
• Patent Error Or Omission
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Rule-42

Centlec (SOC) Ltd v Masepole and Others (A52/2022)

Centlec (SOC) Ltd v Masepole and Others (A52/2022) [2023] ZAFSHC 73 (16 March 2023)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A52/2022

Judges

C.J. Musi, P.J. Loubser, M.E. Mahlangu

The High Court held that Centlec could reverse the respondents’ promotions because they were based on a common mistake about the applicable policy.

• Common Mistake
• Employment Contract
• Unilateral Demotion
• Rapid Progression Policy
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Common-mistake

Blue Crane Route Municipality v Municipal Workers Retirement Fund (CA 221/2021)

Blue Crane Route Municipality v Municipal Workers Retirement Fund (CA 221/2021) [2023] ZAECMKHC 141 (24 January 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA 221/2021

Judges

N Ntlama-Makhanya, NG Beshe, JE Smith

The Court found that the Municipality failed to establish a bona fide defence to the Fund's claim and did not demonstrate an error or common mistake as envisaged by Rule 42(1)(c). The amended pension fund rule was duly registered and binding from 1 November 2006, and the Municipality's obligation to pay increased contributions was not contingent on its subsequent agreement with the union. The Municipality did not take steps to challenge the validity of the rule through proper legal channels, and its absence from the initial proceedings was not justified. The requirements for rescission under…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Default Judgment
• Pension Fund Rules
• Common Mistake
• Waiver And Peremption

GD Irons Construction Proprietary Limited v Thumos Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others (35401/2013)

GD Irons Construction Proprietary Limited v Thumos Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others (35401/2013) [2022] ZAGPPHC 268 (25 April 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

35401/2013

Judge

Neukircher

The court found that the totality of the evidence, including documentary and witness testimony, established that Capicol 1 (Pty) Ltd was the true employer under the Principal Building Agreement. The reflection of Capicol (Pty) Ltd as employer was a bona fide common mistake. The conduct of the parties, subsequent documentation, and the defendants' own admissions supported rectification. The requirements for rectification were met, and the plaintiff was entitled to judgment against the second defendant for the outstanding balance and interest. The amounts paid under the first six payment certif…

Source excerpt

• Rectification Of Contract
• Principal Building Agreement
• Default Interest
• Business Rescue
• Common Mistake
• Builders Lien

Nedbank Limited v Soodho N.O and Others (2115/2016)

Nedbank Limited v Soodho N.O and Others (2115/2016) [2021] ZAKZDHC 7 (12 March 2021)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

2115/2016

Judge

Olsen

The court found that the deeds of suretyship executed by Mr Soodhoo and the Trust are valid and enforceable. The absence of Mrs Soodhoo's written consent does not invalidate the suretyships because they were executed in the ordinary course of Mr Soodhoo's business as a property investor, as established by both the evidence and relevant case law. Even if written consent was required, the bank did not know and could not reasonably have known that it was lacking, so the transaction is deemed to have occurred with the required consent under section 15(9)(a) of the Matrimonial Property Act. The co…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship Liability
• Matrimonial Property Act
• Mortgage Bond Enforcement
• Rectification Of Contracts
• Misrepresentation
• Common Mistake

Murray and Roberts (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JA40/2018)

Murray and Roberts (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JA40/2018) [2019] ZALAC 58; [2019] 11 BLLR 1224 (LAC); (2019) 40 ILJ 2510 (LAC) (20 August 2019)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA40/2018

Judges

Waglay JP, Jappie JA, Coppin JA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Labour Court was correct in setting aside the settlement agreement and the jurisdictional ruling. Both Murray and Roberts and AMCU, as well as the presiding commissioner, operated under a common mistake regarding the legal position of threshold agreements and organisational rights. The threshold agreements did not preclude AMCU from seeking organisational rights, and the settlement agreement was void as it was based on a common mistaken assumption about the law. The other trade unions party to the threshold agreements did not have a direct and substantial…

Source excerpt

• Organisational Rights
• Threshold Agreements
• Common Mistake
• Joinder
• Settlement Agreement
• Jurisdictional Ruling

Wisdom Through Christ Ministries v Ekhuruleni Metropolitan Municipality (42952/2013)

Wisdom Through Christ Ministries v Ekhuruleni Metropolitan Municipality (42952/2013) [2018] ZAGPJHC 478 (21 August 2018)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

42952/2013

Judge

Spilg

The High Court rectified a municipal land-sale agreement, holding that an undisclosed storm water pipe made the original erf unsuitable and justified substitution of alternative land.

• Rectification Of Contract
• Alienation Of Land Act
• Common Mistake
• Specific Performance
• Municipal Tender Process
• Voetstoots Clause