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
Firstrand Bank Limited v Vellem (M404/2022) [2025] ZANWHC 100 (12 June 2025)
The High Court rescinded a default judgment, finding the wrong entity had been cited and served, and granted Firstrand Bank leave to defend.
Mgwenya and Another v NMI Durban South Motors (Pty) Ltd t/a Garden City Motors Mbombela and Another (525/2023) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 44 (30 May 2025)
The High Court granted a partial stay of execution of a costs order, suspending attachment of the applicants’ right of action pending finalisation of the main action.
First National Bank A Division of Firstrand Bank Limited v Roux (14851/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 208 (19 May 2025)
The High Court refused a defendant’s bid to transfer a credit claim to the magistrates’ court and rejected her application to set the action aside.
Cream We Go (Pty) Ltd and Another v Paul's Homemade (Pty) Ltd and Others (013187/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 205 (4 March 2025)
The High Court granted leave to appeal to the full bench and ordered that costs be dealt with in the main leave hearing.
T.M.C v K.M.P (038855/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 23 (6 January 2025)
The High Court granted Rule 43 interim maintenance for the applicant and minor child, rejected technical objections, and ordered child-related support pending divorce.
H.X v G.X (017721/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 11 (3 January 2025)
A Rule 43 interim maintenance application was dismissed after the court found the applicant had failed to make full and frank financial disclosure.
J.B and Another v J.L.S and Another (22199/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1367 (31 December 2024)
The court found that the first applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of a material change in circumstances since the previous Rule 43 order. The applicant did not annex relevant financial statements or bank records covering the period after the order, and his disclosures were incomplete. The court emphasized the duty of utmost good faith and full disclosure in Rule 43 applications, as established in Du Preez v Du Preez. The material non-disclosures meant the applicant was not before the court with clean hands, justifying refusal of the relief sought. The court exercised its discreti…
Source excerpt
J.P.N v N.A.N (51791/2020) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1337 (17 December 2024)
The court found that the applicant and children are in need of interim maintenance pending the finalisation of divorce proceedings. The applicant's financial position has deteriorated due to unemployment, mental health issues, and cancer diagnosis, and she no longer receives income from joint business interests. The respondent has substantial means and historically paid for the family's expenses, but has ceased doing so since separation. The applicant's expenses are reasonable and consistent with the marital standard of living. The respondent's arguments regarding the applicant's earning capa…
Source excerpt
A.S N.O and Others v M.S (83094/2018) [2024] ZAGPPHC 539 (7 June 2024)
The High Court held that wasted costs from a failed trial enrolment should be costs in the cause, and refused a punitive costs order against the respondent personally.
Mpembe and Another v Minister of Police and Another (2226/2022) [2024] ZANWHC 131 (23 May 2024)
The court granted upliftment of the bar, dismissed a strike-out application, and upheld the plaintiffs’ Rule 30 complaint over a premature plea filing.
Explore more
