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
De Sanders Greef N.O and Another v GPP Properties CC and Another (20506/2023) [2025] ZAWCHC 81 (20 February 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against a judgment upholding an exception, finding no reasonable prospect of success.
Makgolo v South African Legal Practice Council (37542/2020) [2024] ZAGPPHC 831 (13 February 2024)
The High Court dismissed an attorney admission application, holding that the candidate attorney’s contract was void and that he was not fit and proper.
KGA Life Limited v Multisure Corporation (Pty) Ltd and Others (304/2022) [2023] ZASCA 122; [2023] 4 All SA 613 (SCA); 2024 (3) SA 51 (SCA) (20 September 2023)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the group funeral insurance scheme between KGA and Multisure became unlawful and unenforceable upon the coming into effect of the Insurance Act 18 of 2017 and KGA's conversion to a licensed insurer. The scheme did not comply with the statutory definition of a group and policyholder under the new Act, and its continued operation constituted a contravention of section 5(1), rendering the contracts void due to supervening illegality. Multisure's purported cancellation of the intermediary agreement and appointment of a new underwriter had no legal effect, as…
Source excerpt
KwaDukuza Municipality v Skillful 1169 CC and Another (11060/2017) [2018] ZAKZDHC 35 (6 July 2018)
The court found that the applicant did not comply with the competitive bidding requirements set out in s 217 of the Constitution and s 112 of the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act. Although regulation 32 permits procurement under contracts secured by other organs of state, such procurement must be based on a valid competitive bidding process and proper consent. In this case, the applicant failed to demonstrate that all statutory requirements were met, and the agreements were therefore invalid. The court held that the contracts appointing the first and second respondents as ma…
Source excerpt
Pheiffer and Others v About it Pretoria (Pty) Ltd and Others (65188/2014) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1232 (10 November 2016)
The court held that the agreement relied upon by the plaintiffs was ab initio null and void because it was signed by unauthorised trustees, in contravention of section 6(1) of the Trust Property Control Act. The statutory requirement for written authorisation from the Master is absolute, and any contract entered into before such authority is obtained is void and incapable of ratification. The court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that a peculiar factual matrix or subsequent ratification could validate the agreement. The declaration failed to plead sufficient facta probanda, and the plaintif…
Source excerpt
Greater Tzaneen Municipality v Bravospan 252 CC (238/2015) [2016] ZALMPPHC 17 (19 August 2016)
The High Court held that the extension of a municipal security services agreement was unlawful for non-compliance with procurement requirements and declared it null and void.
Four Arrows Investments 68 v Abigail Construction (20470/2014) [2015] ZASCA 121; 2016 (1) SA 257 (SCA) (17 September 2015)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the contract between Four Arrows and Abigail was, in substance, a sale of a portion of agricultural land subject to a suspensive condition, namely Ministerial consent. This falls squarely within the prohibition of s 3(e)(i) of the Subdivision of Agricultural Land Act 70 of 1970, which renders such contracts void unless the Minister has consented in writing. The purported option clause did not create a true option, as the contract did not provide for repayment of the purchase price if the option was not exercised, and the parties intended the sale to proce…
Source excerpt
Superintendent-General: North West Department of Education and Another v African Paper Products (Pty) Ltd and Others (M282/14) [2014] ZANWHC 29 (24 October 2014)
The court found that the tender process was vitiated by multiple material irregularities, including the acceptance of an expired BBBEE certificate by the first respondent, the post-closing amendment of the bid price by the second respondent, and the introduction of requirements (such as SABS certificates and revised pricing) not stipulated in the original tender documents. These actions violated the principles of fairness, transparency, and legality required by section 217 of the Constitution and the Preferential Procurement Regulations. The court held that the administrative acts leading to…
Source excerpt
Claasen v Bester (872/10) [2011] ZASCA 197; 2012 (2) SA 404 (SCA) (23 November 2011)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that prescription runs when the creditor knows the material facts, not when the legal consequences are appreciated.
Claasen v Bester in re: Bester v Claasen and Another [2010] ZAFSHC 143 (15 November 2010)
The Free State High Court granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal on prescription issues arising from a disputed sale of immovable property.
Explore more
