Mama Money (Pty) Ltd v Siphumelele Logistics (Pty) Ltd (Ex Tempore) (2498/2024) [2024] ZAECQBHC 67 (18 September 2024)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha
Case number
2498/2024
Judge
B.B. Brody
The court postponed a provisional liquidation application, gave the respondent a final chance to file opposing papers, and ordered wasted costs against the respondent and its former attorney.
Pathways Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Skyfi Internet Solutions (Pty) Ltd and Others (32429/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 45 (21 January 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
32429/2021
Judge
Mbongwe
The applicant failed to establish locus standi as it did not prove direct shareholding in the first respondent, nor did it rebut the respondents' evidence regarding its lack of interest. The applicant's cause of action was unfounded, as it sought damages for reflective loss, which is not permissible; only the company may claim for wrongs done to it. The requirements for an Anton Piller order were not met, as the applicant did not have an existing cause of action and sought the order to scout for a claim rather than preserve vital evidence. The respondents provided cogent proof of the legitima…
Eclipse Systems and Another v He & She Investments (Pty) Ltd; Tyremac Tyres & Tubes CC and Another v He & She Investments (Pty) Ltd (A294/19) [2020] ZAWCHC 96; 2020 (6) SA 497 (WCC) (4 September 2020)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
A294/19
Judges
M Sher, A Le Grange, O Rogers
The court found that the appellants had set out a defence with sufficient particularity, including a prima facie defence of prescription in respect of certain transactions. The respondent's particulars of claim did not allege when it became aware of the identity of the appellants or the facts giving rise to the debts, and thus, on the face of it, some claims had prescribed. The court held that the issues of agency, attribution of knowledge, and the bona fides of the appellants' defence could not be finally determined on the papers and required ventilation at trial. The summary judgment proced…
Visser v De Villiers and Another (1853/09) [2010] ZAGPPHC 608 (18 May 2010)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
1853/09
Judge
Ebersohn
The court found that the applicant was not entitled to have the R1 million deposit paid into his personal account. The applicant provided false information to the respondents, leading them to believe the funds were being paid into the bond account of the second respondent, as required by the sale agreement. The applicant failed to prove any authorisation from the second respondent to receive or use the deposit, nor did he provide any supporting documentation or confirmatory affidavits. The court held that the applicant fraudulently induced the payment and used the funds for his own benefit an…
Tshumi and Others v Queensburgh Plastics and Another (D455/97) [1998] ZALC 110 (13 November 1998)
Court
Labour Court
Case number
D455/97
Judge
A A Landman
The Labour Court dismissed a contempt application against a company director, holding that knowledge of the order and wilful disobedience were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
