South Africa Case Law

Alleluia Ministries International NPC v Kings Vision Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/077307)

Alleluia Ministries International NPC v Kings Vision Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (2024/077307) [2025] ZAGPJHC 68 (31 January 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/077307

Judge

M A Makume

The High Court dismissed an urgent application to prevent a claim being treated as abandoned under section 359 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973.

• Companies Act 1973 Section 359
• Liquidation Proceedings
• Urgent Application
• Creditor Claims
• Condonation Of Noncompliance
• Urgency

Daytay (Pty) Ltd v Magra Process Engineering (Pty) Ltd (1919/2022)

Daytay (Pty) Ltd v Magra Process Engineering (Pty) Ltd (1919/2022) [2024] ZANWHC 282 (14 November 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

1919/2022

Judge

Masike

The High Court condoned late compliance with an amendment order, reinstated the claim, and allowed amendment of the particulars of claim. Costs were awarded against the applicant.

• Condonation Of Noncompliance
• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Court Order Variation
• Condonation
• Amendment-of-pleadings

Minister: National Department of Public Works & Infrastructure v HBC Construction (Pty) Ltd and Others - Appeal (CA213/2021)

Minister: National Department of Public Works & Infrastructure v HBC Construction (Pty) Ltd and Others - Appeal (CA213/2021) [2023] ZAECMKHC 109 (3 August 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA213/2021

Judges

Hartle, Majiki, Bands

The court held that the Bid Evaluation Committee's decisions to declare the second and third respondents' bids administratively responsive were unlawful, as both failed to comply with mandatory requirements stipulated in the tender documents. The Department's differential treatment of non-compliance was unjustified and inconsistent with the principles of fairness and transparency in public procurement. The risk assessment process, while permissible as objective criteria if properly stipulated, was not determinative in this instance because only the first respondent remained as a responsive bi…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Judicial Review Under Paja
• Bid Responsiveness
• Objective Criteria In Tender Awards
• Condonation Of Noncompliance

YMB Investments (Pty) Ltd v Molale and Others (2022/11925)

YMB Investments (Pty) Ltd v Molale and Others (2022/11925) [2022] ZAGPJHC 340 (18 May 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/11925

Judge

E Molahlehi

Urgent interdict and eviction relief was granted against alleged invaders of unfinished buildings at a Johannesburg construction site; PIE was held not to apply.

• Eviction
• Urgent Interdict
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Unlawful Occupation
• Joinder
• Condonation Of Noncompliance

Arcelormittal South Africa Limited v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa obo Members and Others (J1343/21)

Arcelormittal South Africa Limited v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa obo Members and Others (J1343/21) [2021] ZALCJHB 433 (8 November 2021)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J1343/21

Judge

Nkutha-Nkontwana

The court found that NUMSA and the affected employees failed to comply with the dispute resolution procedure set out in the Recognition Agreement, which is binding and enforceable as a collective agreement under the LRA. The majority judgment in BMW South Africa (Pty) Ltd v NUMSA obo Members was applied, confirming that parties are obliged to follow the procedures in their collective agreements before resorting to industrial action. The court rejected the argument that substantial compliance or compliance with section 64 of the LRA alone suffices, holding that strict adherence to the agreed p…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreement Enforcement
• Unprotected Strike
• Dispute Resolution Procedure
• Refusal To Bargain
• Urgent Interdict
• Condonation Of Noncompliance

Armas Developments (Pty) Limited v Singh and Another (1325/2017)

Armas Developments (Pty) Limited v Singh and Another (1325/2017) [2017] ZAKZDHC 37 (12 June 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

1325/2017

Judge

Masipa

Urgent application for interim eviction relief dismissed for procedural non-compliance and because the relief was effectively final in nature.

• Urgent Interdict
• Eviction
• Rei Vindicatio
• Condonation Of Noncompliance
• Interim Relief
• Urgent-interdict

Pillay v Master of High Court, Durban and Another (5663/2016)

Pillay v Master of High Court, Durban and Another (5663/2016) [2017] ZAKZDHC 20 (26 April 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

5663/2016

Judge

Chetty

The court found that the only non-compliance with the Wills Act was the delay in filing the commissioner's certificate, which was explained as an oversight and not indicative of fraud or impropriety. The will was properly executed, witnessed, and signed by the commissioner of oaths, and the testatrix's intentions were clear and undisputed except for hearsay allegations. The court exercised its discretion under section 2(3) of the Wills Act, holding that the document executed by Sheila Pillay was intended to be her last will and testament, and that the delay in submitting the certificate did n…

Source excerpt

• Wills Act Formalities
• Testamentary Intention
• Condonation Of Noncompliance
• Estate Administration

Golden Falls Trading 116 (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Energy National Government and Others (27743/2015)

Golden Falls Trading 116 (Pty) Ltd v Minister of Energy National Government and Others (27743/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 365 (5 June 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

27743/2015

Judge

N.M. Mavundla

The High Court struck an urgent application off the roll, finding the alleged harm was commercial, urgency was not shown, and the timeframes were unduly truncated.

• Condonation Of Noncompliance
• Interim Interdict
• Urgency
• Abridgment Of Timeframes
• Petroleum Licensing
• Interim-interdict

Klipriviersoog v Gemeenskapsontwikkelingsraad (116/84)

Klipriviersoog v Gemeenskapsontwikkelingsraad (116/84) [1986] ZASCA 124 (10 November 1986)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

116/84

Judges

Trengove, Hoexter, Grosskopf

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in its interpretation of Rule 6(2) and the requirement for security for costs. The appellant's failure to provide security was based on a bona fide legal misunderstanding, supported by advice from counsel and the registrar. The court granted condonation for this noncompliance. On the merits, the court found that the trial court undervalued the expropriated land by relying too heavily on the respondent's expert and failing to adequately consider the evidence of the appellant's experts regarding the land's commercial potential, locatio…

Source excerpt

• Expropriation
• Compensation For Expropriation
• Market Value Assessment
• Security For Costs
• Condonation Of Noncompliance