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
Chetty v Pillay (AR373/2023) [2025] ZAKZPHC 64 (2 July 2025)
The High Court upheld an appeal, set aside a prescription ruling, and held that the estate-based prescription defence was not proved on the evidence.
L.M.P v N.J.D.P (Appeal) (HCAA33/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 122 (19 June 2025)
Appeal upheld after the High Court found the trial proceeded on an imperfect stated case and unresolved facts about whether a customary marriage existed.
B.G.N v N.P.N (755/2021) [2025] ZAECMKHC 39 (15 April 2025)
Divorce action in which the High Court granted forfeiture of the plaintiff’s half share of the defendant’s pension interest, finding substantial misconduct and undue benefit.
S.M v M.M and Another (038386/2025) [2025] ZAGPJHC 431 (4 April 2025)
The High Court granted urgent interdictory relief and consolidated two divorce actions to preserve disputed assets pending determination of marital status and ownership.
Ndlovu v Old Mutual Limited and Another (1908/2022) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 22 (27 March 2025)
The High Court struck an urgent application off the roll, finding that the applicant had not shown real urgency and could obtain redress in due course.
M.B.M v M.G (2023/126365) [2025] ZAGPJHC 337 (27 March 2025)
Divorce of a customary marriage was granted, the settlement agreement was made an order, and the defendant received 50% of the plaintiff’s pension interests.
K.A.M and Another v S.S.M (1060/25) [2025] ZANWHC 51 (12 March 2025)
The court found that the applicants failed to establish urgency as required by Uniform Rule 6(12)(b). The delay of seven days in bringing the application was unexplained and amounted to self-created urgency. The applicants did not demonstrate that they would suffer undue hardship if the matter was not heard urgently, as they have access to other vehicles and substantial income. The dispute regarding the Toyota motor vehicle will be determined in the magistrates court on the scheduled return date, where the applicants will have substantial redress. Consequently, the application was not suitabl…
Source excerpt
Mabena v Ramonaka and Others (2529/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 128 (13 February 2025)
The court found that the applicant and the deceased met the essential requirements for a valid customary marriage under section 3(1) of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act. The evidence showed that both parties consented, lobola was fully paid, and they lived together as husband and wife, raising children and acquiring property. The absence of certain Sepedi rituals, specifically the bridal transfer, did not invalidate the marriage, as customary law is flexible and must be interpreted in light of the parties' intentions and lived experience. The court relied on the Supreme Court of App…
Source excerpt
S.J.M v S.J.K (034304/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 92 (7 February 2025)
Divorce case on section 9(1) forfeiture led to a partial forfeiture of the defendant’s GEPF pension interest, with the plaintiff awarded 20%.
Sheriff of the High Court, Cape Town West v Foster and Another (21464/2018 ; 8526/2019) [2024] ZAWCHC 397 (28 November 2024)
Interpleader dispute over attached movable goods, with competing claims by an execution creditor and Ms Kirst. The court mostly upheld Ms Kirst’s ownership claim.
Explore more
