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
University of Zululand v Dlongolo (DA23/2023) [2025] ZALAC 1; [2025] 5 BLLR 503 (LAC); (2025) 46 ILJ 1146 (LAC) (21 January 2025)
The Labour Appeal Court held there was no consensus on an early-retirement pension arrangement because the employee should have queried an obvious drafting mistake.
Man in One CC v Matjhabeng Local Municipality (6692/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 281 (5 September 2024)
The High Court held that no binding settlement was proved, finding no sufficient written acceptance of the R25 million offer and dismissing the application with costs.
Sunlyn (Pty) Ltd and Others v Smart Drawn Projects (Pty) Ltd and Others (1937/2022) [2023] ZANWHC 145 (17 August 2023)
The court found that the defendants' reliance on iustus error was not supported by the facts or law. The agreement and guarantee clearly identified Sunlyn as the contracting party, and the defendants signed these documents without raising any queries, despite being experienced businesspersons. The principle of caveat subscriptor applies, binding the defendants to the terms of the agreement they signed. The alleged mistake regarding the identity of the contracting party was not reasonable or excusable, and there was no evidence of misrepresentation by Sunlyn. Furthermore, the evidence showed t…
Source excerpt
Juggernaut Trucking CC v Groundworx Construction Corporation (Proprietary) Limited (92/2022) [2023] ZAMPMHC 7 (2 March 2023)
The High Court granted provisional liquidation after finding the applicant had shown a prima facie debt and that the respondent’s set-off defence was not bona fide.
Bartie N.O. and Others v Fraaikem Pharmacy (Pty) Ltd (A236/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 157 (17 August 2022)
The High Court held that the trust’s conduct created a binding renewed lease with Fraaikem Pharmacy and dismissed the eviction appeal with costs.
Herclass and Another v Herclass (2322/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 157 (29 June 2022)
The High Court dismissed a father's claim for repayment of an alleged R536 000 loan because the loan terms, especially repayment, were not pleaded or proved.
M v M (32624/2015) [2022] ZAGPJHC 484; 2022 (6) SA 255 (GJ) (29 June 2022)
The court held that, in this Division, the declared commencement value in an antenuptial contract is conclusive and binding unless attacked on recognised contractual grounds such as fraud, misrepresentation, duress, or undue influence. The plaintiff did not plead or prove any such grounds. Evidence aimed at challenging the accuracy of the commencement value was therefore irrelevant. The plaintiff also failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the defendant's estate showed an accrual beyond the CPI-adjusted commencement value, even accepting her own alleged lower commencement value.…
Source excerpt
Phadu v Road Accident Fund (LP/PLK/RC84/2017; HCA15/2019) [2020] ZALMPPHC 78 (21 September 2020)
The High Court found that the Magistrate erred in setting aside the settlement agreement entered into between the parties. The defendant's alleged mistake was not justus error but gross professional negligence, which does not justify rescission of a binding contract. The parol evidence rule applies, and the written offer and acceptance constitute the exclusive record of the agreement. The Magistrate acted ultra vires by setting aside the contract and ordering further negotiation, as only the High Court, Supreme Court of Appeal, and Constitutional Court have inherent jurisdiction to regulate t…
Source excerpt
Phadu v Road Accident Fund (HCA15/2019) [2020] ZALMPPHC 92 (21 September 2020)
The High Court upheld an appeal against setting aside a settlement, finding the accepted offer was binding and could not be rescinded for unilateral mistake.
Kuisis and Another v Free State Gambling, Liquor and Tourism Authority and Others (A118/2018) [2020] ZAFSHC 73 (26 March 2020)
The High Court reviewed and set aside the Authority’s decision holding two bookmakers liable on void or impossible betting tickets from the 2015 Cricket World Cup.
Explore more
