Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
4 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2023] ZAGPJHC 541

Malvern Trading CC v Absa Bank Ltd (2021/50947)

Malvern Trading CC v Absa Bank Ltd (2021/50947) [2023] ZAGPJHC 541; 2024 (1) SA 478 (GJ) (23 May 2023)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2021/50947
Judge
D Marais

The court held that service of process at the registered office of a close corporation is valid, irrespective of the corporation's physical presence at that address. The Close Corporations Act and Uniform Rules of Court provide for service at the registered office, and the rationale is to ensure certainty and accessibility for third parties. The choice of a domicilium citandi does not preclude other lawful methods of service unless the agreement expressly limits service to that address. Jurisdiction is conferred on the court by the location of the registered office, and the dual jurisdiction…

Source excerpt

  • Close Corporations Act
  • Service Of Process
  • Jurisdiction
  • Domicilium Citandi
  • Default Judgment
  • Constitutional Access To Courts
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2022] ZAGPJHC 576

Van Den Bos N.O. v Mogoane and Others (2021/5838)

Van Den Bos N.O. v Mogoane and Others (2021/5838) [2022] ZAGPJHC 576 (18 August 2022)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2021/5838
Judge
JJC Swanepoel

The applicant, as properly appointed administrator under section 16 of the Sectional Titles Schemes Managing Act, has locus standi to bring the application. The respondents' challenge to locus standi fails in light of previous judgments confirming the applicant's authority. The High Court has discretion to grant process-in-aid for enforcement of a Magistrate's Court judgment where effective remedies in the lower court are unavailable. The applicant's uncontested affidavit demonstrates repeated failures to obtain special execution orders in the Magistrates' Courts, justifying recourse to the H…

Source excerpt

  • Special Execution
  • Sectional Titles Schemes Managing Act
  • Process In Aid
  • Reserve Price Setting
  • Constitutional Access To Courts
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2021] ZAGPJHC 145

Eskom SOC Ltd v Oracle Corporation South Africa (Pty) Ltd (12773/2021)

Eskom SOC Ltd v Oracle Corporation South Africa (Pty) Ltd (12773/2021) [2021] ZAGPJHC 145 (31 March 2021)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
12773/2021
Judge
Wepener

The court found that the applicant failed to establish a clear right to the interim relief sought. The agreement between the parties expressly provided that the respondent could terminate services if payment was not made within 30 days following an audit. The applicant's disagreement with the audit outcome did not qualify or suspend the respondent's contractual right to terminate. Section 34 of the Constitution was not infringed, as the applicant's access to court was not obstructed; the main action was proceeding unhindered. The principle from Metcash Trading Ltd v Commissioner of SARS was d…

Source excerpt

  • Interim Interdict
  • Contractual Rights
  • Mandamus
  • Constitutional Access To Courts
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2016] ZANCHC 69

Morudi and Others v N C Housing Services and Development Co Ltd (1735/2014)

Morudi and Others v N C Housing Services and Development Co Ltd (1735/2014) [2016] ZANCHC 69 (12 August 2016)

Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Case number
1735/2014
Judge
Lever

The court found that several grounds of appeal raised by the applicants had reasonable prospects of success. Specifically, the question of whether the applicants were cited as directors or shareholders, the adequacy of their explanation for default, the effect of the Mamosebo AJ judgment, the existence of a share register, the interpretation of Rule 42(1)(a), and the alleged infringement of constitutional rights were all matters on which another court might reasonably reach a different conclusion. The court determined that the interests of justice required the matter to be heard by the Suprem…

Source excerpt

  • Rescission Of Judgment
  • Joinder Of Parties
  • Leave To Appeal
  • Shareholder Rights
  • Rule 42 Uniform Rules
  • Constitutional Access To Courts
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2011] ZAFSHC 168

Thabo Mofutsanyana District Municipality v Uncle Mass Tuck Shop (A333/10)

Thabo Mofutsanyana District Municipality v Uncle Mass Tuck Shop (A333/10) [2011] ZAFSHC 168 (31 October 2011)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
A333/10
Judges
C.J. Musi, Kruger

The magistrate erred in dismissing the appellant's action under Rule 27(5) without properly considering the agreement between the parties to hold the matter in abeyance pending finalisation of exception proceedings in the High Court. The agreement did not constitute a waiver of rights but a suspension until the appeal process was exhausted. The noting of an appeal suspended the operation of the High Court judgment, and the proceedings were not finalised until the appeal was decided. The magistrate failed to exercise judicial discretion by not considering less restrictive means to bring the ma…

Source excerpt

  • Dismissal For Want Of Prosecution
  • Rule 27 Magistrates Court
  • Waiver Of Rights
  • Judicial Discretion
  • Constitutional Access To Courts
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2007] ZAWCHC 55

Mittal Steel South Africa limited t/a Vereeniging Steel v Pipechem CC (7072/07)

Mittal Steel South Africa limited t/a Vereeniging Steel v Pipechem CC (7072/07) [2007] ZAWCHC 55; 2008 (1) SA 640 (C) ; (16 October 2007)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
7072/07
Judge
Donen

The court held that while Uniform Rule 19(1) generally requires a juristic person to deliver a notice of intention to defend through an attorney, this rule must be interpreted in light of the constitutional right of access to courts. Denying a close corporation the ability to be represented by its managing member, who is its alter ego, would unjustly limit its right to a fair hearing. The court found that the prejudice to the defendant from default judgment based solely on the technical irregularity would be disproportionate and unjustifiable. Accordingly, the court exercised its discretion t…

Source excerpt

  • Notice Of Intention To Defend
  • Representation Of Juristic Persons
  • Default Judgment
  • Close Corporations Act
  • Constitutional Access To Courts
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.