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
Mohamed v Moosa and Others (44567/2021) [2025] ZAGPPHC 681 (2 July 2025)
Eviction and interdict applications failed after the court found a genuine factual dispute about occupation, payments, and the validity of a sale agreement.
Morakadi and Another v Bakone Ba Masha Mokopole Communal Property Association and Others (HCAA39/2023) [2024] ZALMPPHC 161 (1 November 2024)
The appeal was dismissed because the appellants failed to present sufficient evidence that the First Respondent was unwilling or unable to pay its debts or meet its obligations, or that it would be just and equitable to place it under administration. The court found that the alleged maladministration and misconduct did not amount to a breakdown of trust among all members, nor did it justify such a drastic remedy. The Sixth Respondent was already undertaking regularization measures, and alternative remedies under the Communal Property Association Act had not been exhausted by the appellants. T…
Source excerpt
Octavia Data Exchange (Pty) Ltd v Life Wise CC t/a Eldan Auto Body (2023-0662813) [2024] ZAGPPHC 956 (20 September 2024)
The applicant established ownership and title to the Mercedes Benz V 222, and the respondent was in possession of the vehicle at the time of the application. The respondent failed to prove any agreement with the applicant regarding storage costs and did not issue invoices or communicate such costs. The respondent's reliance on a tacit contract for storage costs was unsupported by evidence. The law does not permit a lien-holder to claim storage costs absent a contractual relationship with the owner. The respondent's purported counter-application was procedurally defective and could not be adju…
Source excerpt
Dr Fekeni and Others v Lombard Insurance Company Limited and Another (43891/19) [2024] ZAGPJHC 84 (2 February 2024)
The High Court dismissed claims under a construction guarantee and a counterclaim, holding the demand was non-compliant and business rescue did not trigger the clause relied on.
Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Baxter (26936/2015) [2024] ZAGPJHC 5 (3 January 2024)
The court found that the respondent had defaulted on his loan obligations and, by agreement, granted a special power of attorney post-default to the applicant, authorising the sale of the properties to reduce his indebtedness. The sale was conducted in accordance with the power of attorney, and the respondent was kept informed throughout the process. The respondent's allegations of underselling and lack of notification were unsubstantiated and contradicted by documentary evidence, including email correspondence and valuations. The court held that the parate executie principle was not violated…
Source excerpt
Sher Con Surfacing (Pty) Ltd v Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality and Another (3680/2023) [2023] ZAFSHC 470 (1 December 2023)
An urgent application for payment relief failed amid disputed invoices and a pending regional court action; the court dismissed Part B and granted measurement-based counter-relief.
Investec Bank Limited v Singh and Another (017911/2023) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1887 (6 November 2023)
The High Court dismissed Singh’s urgent counter-application in sequestration proceedings, holding the claimed urgency was self-created and the requested relief speculative.
Nicolosi NO and Others v Rose and Others (3631/2018) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1240 (30 October 2023)
The High Court dismissed condonation for a late counter-application and upheld a rule 30 application, finding no good cause for the delayed filing.
Harmse v Bulb World Electronics and Another (UM12/2023) [2023] ZANWHC 241 (12 October 2023)
Urgent contempt application dismissed after the court found no proven wilful breach of an interdict; the counter-application was struck off for lack of urgency.
Acacia Finance (Pty) Ltd v Sure Guard CC and Others (2012/16759) [2023] ZAGPJHC 278 (29 March 2023)
The court found that the respondents failed to raise any bona fide or material disputes of fact. The Settlement Agreement, made an order of court, remains binding and enforceable, and the prescription period applicable is thirty years. The respondents' arguments regarding prescription, full and final settlement, cash payments, and authority to enter into the agreement were unsupported and dismissed. The rectification sought was minor and granted. The counter-application to set aside the mortgage bond was found to be meritless, as the debt is judgment-based and the necessary authority for regi…
Source excerpt
Explore more
