Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Commercial And Corporate [2018] ZAGPJHC 687

Fitzgerald v Filter Focus (SA) (Pty) Ltd; Fitzgerald v Integrated Fluid Technologies (Pty) Ltd (26849/17; 26850/17)

Fitzgerald v Filter Focus (SA) (Pty) Ltd; Fitzgerald v Integrated Fluid Technologies (Pty) Ltd (26849/17; 26850/17) [2018] ZAGPJHC 687 (26 November 2018)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
26849/17; 26850/17
Judge
R M Keightley

The court found that the respondents failed to establish a bona fide and reasonable dispute of the debt owed to the applicant. The alleged 'understanding' regarding repayment was vague, unsupported by confirmatory affidavits, and lacked sufficient particularity to constitute a valid defence. The supplementary affidavit introducing new repayment conditions was deemed an afterthought, undermining the credibility of the defence. The counterclaim by Filter Focus regarding the vehicle did not constitute a valid monetary set-off, as the asset remained company property and no unlawful transfer or sa…

Source excerpt

  • Winding Up Of Company
  • Creditor Locus Standi
  • Bona Fide Dispute Of Debt
  • Counterclaim Set Off
  • Statutory Demand
  • Company Liquidation
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2007] ZAWCHC 91

Wallace v Ballprop Ten (Pty) Ltd (1153/2005)

Wallace v Ballprop Ten (Pty) Ltd (1153/2005) [2007] ZAWCHC 91 (16 October 2007)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
1153/2005
Judge
Bozalek

The court found that, despite several suspicious features and apparent improbabilities in the defendant's counterclaim, it could not at this stage conclude that the counterclaim was frivolous, vexatious, or manifestly unsubstantial. The admitted claim and the counterclaim, while arising from different agreements, both relate to the broader commercial relationship between the parties. The court noted that Rule 22(4) is designed to avoid multiplicity of actions and to resolve all issues between the parties in one trial. The plaintiff did not demonstrate that it would suffer especial financial p…

Source excerpt

  • Rule 22 4 Postponement
  • Counterclaim Set Off
  • Joint Venture Agreement
  • Admitted Claim
  • Judicial Discretion
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.