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
Pienaar and Another v Cowens and Another (11933/2020) [2025] ZAWCHC 334 (5 August 2025)
The High Court refused leave to amend a claim to add fraudulent misrepresentation, finding the new cause of action prescribed and prejudicial to the defendants.
BMW Financial Services CC v Ndlangisa Funeral Services CC and Another (12251/2023P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 66 (9 July 2025)
Condonation for the late filing of the summary judgment application is refused because, although the delay was minimal and reasonably explained, the applicant failed to demonstrate any prospects of success in the summary judgment application. The respondents had remedied the arrears prior to the hearing, and the evidence did not establish a persistent breach at the time of summons. Enforcement of cancellation and repossession in these circumstances is contrary to public policy and fairness, as the underlying indebtedness had been cured. The respondents raised genuine disputes of fact regardin…
Source excerpt
Van den Berg Water (Pty) Ltd t/a Oasis Water Lynnwood and Others v Oasis Water (Pty) Ltd and Another (989/2023; 988/2023; 1120/2023) [2025] ZASCA 98 (4 July 2025)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the post-termination provisions in the franchise agreements were clear and enforceable, requiring franchisees to return all proprietary materials, signage, and cease using Oasis' business system and intellectual property. The evidence established that the franchisees retained and used confidential information, client lists, and marketing strategies gained during the franchise period, and continued to exploit Oasis' business system after termination. The constitutional defences and CPA-based arguments were either not properly pleaded or unsupported by evid…
Source excerpt
Khumalo v RZT Zelpy 4300 (Pty) Ltd t/a Automax George and Another (NCT-328494-2024-75(1)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 34 (18 June 2025)
The Tribunal found that the vehicle was sold with tyres that were significantly aged and defective, as confirmed by an expert report. The suppliers failed to disclose the tyres' condition, and reliance solely on a roadworthiness certificate was inadequate for CPA compliance. The defective tyre rendered the vehicle unsafe and unsuitable for its intended purpose, infringing the applicant's right to safe, good quality goods under section 55(2) of the CPA. The Tribunal held that a defective tyre is a serious defect, making the entire vehicle defective. However, the Tribunal interpreted section 56…
Source excerpt
Masindwa v Hi Way Motors (Pty) Ltd and Another (NCT/347179/2024/75(1)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 30 (18 June 2025)
The Tribunal found a vehicle repairer failed to diagnose and repair a consumer’s vehicle properly under the CPA and ordered further repair within ten business days.
Witbooi v CDR Motors (Pty) Ltd Trading As Ceres Toyota and Another (NCT/373686/2025/75(1)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 31 (18 June 2025)
The Tribunal refused leave to refer a consumer complaint, finding it was time-barred under section 116(a) of the Consumer Protection Act.
National Consumer Commission v Econocom 357 (Pty) Ltd) t/a Leather Gallery (NCT/388029/2025/73(2)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 37 (18 June 2025)
The Tribunal found a CPA contravention only in Van Heerden’s complaint, ordered a refund, and declined an administrative fine. Noise complaints were not material defects.
National Consumer Commission v De Jager N.O and Another (NCT/376591/2025/73(2)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 36 (3 June 2025)
The Tribunal found that the respondents, acting as trustees of the Shabach Trust trading as Droom Troue, intentionally misled consumers by advertising a competition that did not exist and requiring payment of undisclosed fees to claim a prize. The advertisements failed to disclose that participation was for a reality show, and the MOUs signed by complainants referred to them as winners of a competition. The Tribunal held that the respondents' conduct was unconscionable, misleading, and deceptive, contravening sections 4(5)(b) and 36(2)(a)(i) of the CPA. Although no promotional competition was…
Source excerpt
Richards v Ellite Body Pannels (Pty) Ltd t/a Midrand Motorcycles and Another (NCT-360566-2024-75(1)(b)) [2025] ZANCT 35 (2 June 2025)
The Tribunal found that the motorcycle was defective and unsafe at the time of sale, specifically due to a faulty starter and subsequent gearbox issues. The first respondent failed to disclose these defects and attempted to contract out of statutory liability through 'as is' and 'voetstoots' clauses, which are unlawful under the CPA. The respondent's refusal to refund the purchase price unconditionally and unauthorized repairs further contravened the applicant's rights. The Tribunal held that the applicant was entitled to a refund of the purchase price, and the respondent's conduct constitute…
Source excerpt
Kerja (Pty) Ltd v Milga Properties (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (2024-049477) [2025] ZAGPPHC 478 (16 May 2025)
The High Court dismissed Kerja’s application for leave to appeal against an eviction order, finding no reasonable prospects of success.
Explore more
