South Africa Case Law

Modjela N.O and Another v Engelbrecht N.O and Another (3783/2022)

Modjela N.O and Another v Engelbrecht N.O and Another (3783/2022) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 56 (18 June 2025)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

3783/2022

Judge

JL Bhengu

The court found that the applicants failed to establish urgency as required by Rule 6(12)(b), having delayed their application despite early notice of the intended sale. The applicants did not comply with their disclosure obligations under section 26(7) of POCA, nor did they engage constructively with the Curator to resolve the matter. Their assertion of irreparable harm was undermined by the existence of a further period for acceptance of tenders and their refusal to discuss alternative means of preserving the property. The court held that the urgency was self-created and that the applicants…

Source excerpt

• Restraint Order
• Interim Interdict
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Fiduciary Duties Of Trustees
• Urgent Application Requirements
• Costs Punitive Order

Dragon Chrome BF (Pty) Ltd and Others v Kietzmann (2025-074447)

Dragon Chrome BF (Pty) Ltd and Others v Kietzmann (2025-074447) [2025] ZAGPPHC 582 (9 June 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-074447

Judge

S. Potterill

The High Court granted a spoliation remedy, suspending interim harassment protection orders and restoring Dragon Chrome’s possession of the site pending arbitration.

• Mandament Of Spolie
• Urgent Interdict
• Possession Of Property
• Harassment Act
• Costs Punitive Order
• Mandament-of-spolie

Van Jaarsveld N.O and Others v Barzani 53 (Pty) Ltd and Others (051185/2023)

Van Jaarsveld N.O and Others v Barzani 53 (Pty) Ltd and Others (051185/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1126 (5 November 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

051185/2023

Judge

Retief

The court found that the first respondent failed to provide any factual or legal basis for its opposition to the cancellation of the caveat. No affidavit from the person with personal knowledge was submitted, and the only opposition was a technical reliance on the business rescue moratorium, which was not substantiated by facts or a valid legal claim to the property. The caveat was registered under Regulation 68 of the Deeds Registries Act, which does not apply in circumstances where the deed is not lost. The opposition was found to be disingenuous and intended to frustrate the transfer proce…

Source excerpt

• Caveat Cancellation
• Business Rescue Moratorium
• Deeds Registries Act
• Costs Punitive Order

Micheals v Firstmile Prop JHB CBD Crown Mines (Pty) Ltd and Another (070685/2024)

Micheals v Firstmile Prop JHB CBD Crown Mines (Pty) Ltd and Another (070685/2024) [2024] ZAGPJHC 949 (20 September 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

070685/2024

Judge

S Yacoob

The High Court struck two urgent applications from the roll for want of urgency after repeated non-compliance with urgent-court procedure and notice requirements.

• Urgent Application Procedure
• Condonation
• Notice Of Motion Requirements
• Costs Punitive Order
• Urgent-application-procedure
• Civil-procedure

Seokodibeng Properties Developer Elias Homes CC JV v MEC for Public Works & Infrastructure Limpopo and Another (7562/23)

Seokodibeng Properties Developer Elias Homes CC JV v MEC for Public Works & Infrastructure Limpopo and Another (7562/23) [2024] ZALMPPHC 151 (4 June 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

7562/23

Judge

Diamond

The High Court made a consolidated arbitration award an order of court and ordered the respondent to comply, granting attorney-and-client costs.

• Arbitration Award Enforcement
• Construction Contract Dispute
• Interim Award
• Costs Punitive Order
• Arbitration-award-enforcement
• Construction-contract-dispute

Matlhake and Another v Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims and Others (M456/2019)

Matlhake and Another v Commission on Traditional Leadership Disputes and Claims and Others (M456/2019) [2024] ZANWHC 61 (6 March 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M456/2019

Judge

Mfenyana

The court found that the Commission acted arbitrarily and failed to comply with the principles of natural justice and the rule of law in conducting its inquiry and compiling its report. The extensions of the Commission's term were not validly made, and the proceedings were marred by procedural irregularities, lack of responsiveness, and improper conduct. The approval of the Commission's report by the Premier was premature and based on a flawed process. The relief sought regarding recusal and constitution of a new Commission was overtaken by events, as the Commission's term had ended. However,…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review Of Administrative Action
• Procedural Fairness
• Condonation Of Late Filing
• Commission Of Inquiry
• Costs Punitive Order

Pirija N.O and Another v Roos and Others (M420/2020)

Pirija N.O and Another v Roos and Others (M420/2020) [2024] ZANWHC 15 (31 January 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M420/2020

Judge

Mfenyana

The court found that the applicants, as trustees of the Mahemsrus Trust, are the lawful owners of the property and have locus standi to bring the eviction application. The respondents’ occupation was without the consent of the trustees and thus unlawful. The first respondent’s claim to a lien was rejected as the improvements were not consented to by the property owner, and the alleged enrichment did not confer a right to remain. The ESTA was found not to apply to the respondents except for Papu, who occupied the property as a worker under Meyer; all other respondents did not qualify as occupi…

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Enrichment Lien
• Locus Standi
• Just And Equitable Eviction
• Costs Punitive Order

H v Sheriff Johannesburg North and Another (2020/44450)

H v Sheriff Johannesburg North and Another (2020/44450) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1012 (11 September 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2020/44450

Judge

Ingrid Opperman

The court dismissed an application to suspend Rule 43 maintenance orders, finding a prior undertaking barred the request and that no stay was justified in the interests of justice.

• Rule 43 Interim Maintenance
• Stay Of Execution
• Pactum De Non Petendo
• Costs Punitive Order
• Rule-45a-stay-of-execution
• Rule-43-maintenance

Dube and Another v Ninarich Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023/00000054)

Dube and Another v Ninarich Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023/00000054) [2023] ZAGPJHC 295 (27 March 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/00000054

Judge

Moorcroft

The court dismissed a spoliation application, finding the applicants were never in peaceful and undisturbed possession and awarding attorney-and-client costs.

• Mandament Van Spolie
• Peaceful And Undisturbed Possession
• Unlawful Deprivation
• Urgent Interdict
• Costs Punitive Order
• Mandament-van-spolie

Webb v Webb (17217/2019)

Webb v Webb (17217/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 144 (16 February 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

17217/2019

Judge

ML Senyatsi

The High Court refused leave to appeal against a contempt order arising from non-compliance with a Rule 43 maintenance order and awarded attorney-and-client costs.

• Rule 43 Maintenance
• Contempt Of Court
• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Punitive Order
• Rule-43-maintenance
• Contempt-of-court