South Africa Case Law

Pareto Limited and Another v Kotze (14109/2024)

Pareto Limited and Another v Kotze (14109/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 338 (8 August 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14109/2024

Judge

J Cloete

The court found that only the Covid-19 defence raised a triable issue, specifically whether the lockdown regulations hindered or prevented the tenant from performing under the lease, thereby entitling the tenant to further rental remission under the force majeure clause. The plaintiffs failed to engage substantively with the contractual provisions regarding hindered performance and remission of rent, and the defendant's submissions on this point met the threshold for a triable issue. The other defences—regarding unliquidated amounts, renegotiated rental, and ambiguity in the deed of suretyshi…

Source excerpt

• Lease Agreement
• Force Majeure
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Summary Judgment
• Remission Of Rent

Sandton Mining (Pty) Ltd v Mashego N.O and Others (JR760/21)

Sandton Mining (Pty) Ltd v Mashego N.O and Others (JR760/21) [2025] ZALCJHB 184 (7 May 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR760/21

Judge

Tlhotlhalemaje

The Court found that the Commissioner was obliged to determine the overall fairness of the dismissal, including the appropriateness of the sanction, notwithstanding the parties' narrowing of the issues. The evidence established that Khubeka made the complaint to SAPS, but the complaint was not false, as there were legitimate concerns regarding PPE shortages. The Commissioner did not commit a gross irregularity, and his findings were not disconnected from the evidence. However, the sanction of dismissal was unwarranted given the circumstances, and while Khubeka's dishonesty was aggravating, it…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Gross Irregularity
• Condonation
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Reinstatement
• Backpay

Mkoko v Minister of Police (2051/2020)

Mkoko v Minister of Police (2051/2020) [2025] ZAECMHC 25 (8 April 2025)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

2051/2020

Judge

Mqobi

The High Court dismissed claims for assault, unlawful arrest and detention, finding the plaintiff’s version unreliable and the police evidence more probable.

• Unlawful Arrest
• Unlawful Detention
• Vicarious Liability
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Onus Of Proof
• Assault Claim

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Nkomati Anthracite (Pty) Ltd (JS614/20)

Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Nkomati Anthracite (Pty) Ltd (JS614/20) [2024] ZALCJHB 406 (11 October 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS614/20

Judge

S Sethene

The Labour Court found that Nkomati Anthracite misread Covid-19 regulations, unlawfully deducted salaries without consent, and unfairly dismissed employees.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Unlawful Salary Deduction
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Collective Agreement
• Essential Services
• Costs Order

AIG South Africa Limited v 43 Air School Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (640/2023)

AIG South Africa Limited v 43 Air School Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (640/2023) [2024] ZASCA 97; [2024] 3 All SA 319 (SCA); 2024 (6) SA 28 (SCA) (13 June 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

640/2023

Judges

Dambuza, Mokgohloa, Matojane, Coppin, Tolmay

The SCA held that business interruption cover was composite, not joint, and that AIG was liable for 43 Air School’s first two Covid-19 claims.

• Business Interruption Insurance
• Policy Interpretation
• Causation
• Reporting Conditions
• Composite Vs Joint Policy
• Covid 19 Regulations

First National Bank v Pieterse (16759/2021)

First National Bank v Pieterse (16759/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1901 (9 November 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

16759/2021

Judge

E van der Schyff

The court dismissed summary judgment after finding the respondent raised a bona fide triable defence based on COVID-19 lockdown effects on her ability to perform.

• Summary Judgment
• Jurisdiction
• Condonation
• Supervening Impossibility Of Performance
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Summary-judgment

Tsutsumani Business Enterprises CC v Competition Tribunal and Others (205/CAC/Jul22)

Tsutsumani Business Enterprises CC v Competition Tribunal and Others (205/CAC/Jul22) [2023] ZACAC 6; [2023] 3 CPLR 34 (CAC) (13 October 2023)

Court

Competition Appeal Court

Case number

205/CAC/Jul22

Judges

Poyo Dlwati, Manoim, Masipa

The court held that the applicant's review application was fatally late and not properly explained, failing to meet the requirements for condonation. On the merits, the Tribunal correctly found the applicant to be a dominant firm under the Competition Act, as its turnover exceeded the statutory threshold and it possessed market power during the COVID-19 crisis. The price charged for masks was excessive and unreasonable, with a mark-up and margin far above competitive benchmarks, and not justified by the applicant's claimed costs. The Tribunal's imposition of a penalty was within its powers an…

Source excerpt

• Excessive Pricing
• Dominance
• Administrative Penalty
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Condonation
• Review Vs Appeal

Competition Commission of South Africa v Bluecollar Occupational Health (Pty) Ltd (COVCR114Sep20)

Competition Commission of South Africa v Bluecollar Occupational Health (Pty) Ltd (COVCR114Sep20) [2023] ZACT 16 (3 April 2023)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

COVCR114Sep20

Judges

M Mazwai, A Wessels, A Ndoni

The Tribunal found that BlueCollar, acting in partnership with Ateltico, acquired temporary market power in the urgent supply of hand sanitiser to SAPS during the Covid-19 pandemic. BlueCollar's pricing was significantly above competitive benchmarks, with a gross margin of 42% and a mark-up of 73%, compared to the appropriate benchmark of 10% to 15% for resellers. The price charged was more than double the National Treasury's list price. BlueCollar failed to justify the reasonableness of its pricing, and Ateltico's profit share could not be treated as a finance cost but as partnership profit…

Source excerpt

• Excessive Pricing
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Dominance
• Administrative Penalty
• Partnership Liability

Peterson and Others v TMNS Business Enterprises CC t/a Protea Centre and Others (Flatela L)

Peterson and Others v TMNS Business Enterprises CC t/a Protea Centre and Others (Flatela L) [2023] ZAGPJHC 159 (10 February 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13252/2022

Judge

Flatela L

The High Court refused summary judgment for alleged rental arrears, holding that the defendants raised triable issues about lease cancellation, COVID-19 disruption, and quantum.

• Summary Judgment
• Lease Agreement
• Rental Arrears
• Suretyship
• Supervening Impossibility
• Covid 19 Regulations

Glencarol (PTY) Ltd v National Bargaining Council for the Clothing Manufacturing Industry (Northern Chamber) and Another (JR 926/2021)

Glencarol (PTY) Ltd v National Bargaining Council for the Clothing Manufacturing Industry (Northern Chamber) and Another (JR 926/2021) [2022] ZALCJHB 353; (2023) 44 ILJ 563 (LC) (7 December 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR 926/2021

Judge

Van Niekerk

The Labour Court set aside a compliance order and arbitration award after finding the Covid-19 lockdown temporarily suspended the employment contracts.

• Supervening Impossibility
• Collective Agreement Interpretation
• Annual Bonus Entitlement
• Annual Leave Accrual
• Covid 19 Regulations
• Contract Suspension