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
Standard Bank of SA Ltd v Rathidili (63008/16) [2017] ZAGPPHC 508 (24 August 2017)
The court dismissed Standard Bank’s summary judgment application, finding the defendant had disclosed a bona fide defence after later payments reduced and extinguished the arrears.
Smith v S (595/2012) [2013] ZASCA 38 (28 March 2013)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellant demonstrated realistic prospects of success on appeal regarding both the theft conviction and the fairness of the trial. The record revealed that the magistrate's conduct was abrasive, inappropriate, and derogatory, undermining the dignity and respect owed to all participants and raising a reasonable prospect that the trial was not fair. Additionally, the state failed to provide sufficient evidence of ownership or lawful possession of the motor vehicle by Bankfin at the relevant time, which is a necessary element for a conviction of theft.…
Source excerpt
Zeda Car Leasing (Pty) Ltd t/a Avis Fleet Services v Pillay and Others (7836/2005) [2006] ZAKZHC 19; 2007 (3) SA 89 (D) (5 June 2006)
The court held that the legal framework governing attorneys' rights of appearance and practice must be interpreted in light of both the Right of Appearance in Courts Act and the Attorneys Act. The 2005 amendment to the Right of Appearance Act extends the right of appearance but does not abolish the territorial enrolment requirements under the Attorneys Act. Therefore, an attorney admitted and enrolled in one provincial division is not entitled to sign pleadings or act as an attorney in another division unless also enrolled there. The applicant's attorney, not being enrolled in the Natal Provi…
Source excerpt
S v Dyantyi (ECJ 070/2005) [2005] ZAECHC 31 (8 September 2005)
The court held that the bank's refusal of the appellant's conditional offer to purchase the vehicle for the full outstanding balance did not discharge the appellant from his suretyship obligations. The bank acted within its contractual and statutory rights under the instalment sale agreement and the Credit Agreements Act by repossessing and selling the vehicle after the principal debtor's default. Any prejudice suffered by the appellant was not the result of a breach of legal duty by the bank, but rather the consequence of the principal debtor's default and the lawful exercise of the bank's r…
Source excerpt
Ukubona 2000 Electrical CC and Another v City Power Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd (155/03) [2004] ZASCA 65; 2004 (6) SA 323 (SCA) (1 June 2004)
The court held that section 84(1) of the Insolvency Act creates a statutory hypothec only in favour of a creditor/seller who is the owner of the goods at the time of the debtor's insolvency. The definition of 'instalment sale transaction' in the Credit Agreements Act includes transactions where the purchase price is payable in one lump sum at a future date. However, since the appellants were not owners of the components at the time of Drivecor's liquidation—their suppliers had reserved ownership and had not been paid—they could not benefit from the statutory hypothec. The legislative intent w…
Source excerpt
BMW Financial Services v De Lange (A3063/03) [2004] ZAGPHC 19 (27 January 2004)
The court found that the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving that the repayments under the instalment sale agreement were tax deductible as required for the exemption under Regulation 4(1) of the Credit Agreements Act. The mere assertion or agreement between the parties does not establish the necessary purpose for which the purchase was made, nor does it prove tax deductibility. The evidence indicated the vehicle was for private use, and the respondent's car allowance did not automatically render repayments tax deductible. Consequently, the agreement was invalid and unenforceabl…
Source excerpt
Parker v Dorbyl Finance (Pty) Ltd and Another (338/95) [1996] ZASCA 131; 1997 (1) SA 862 (SCA); [1997] 1 All SA 74 (A); (21 November 1996)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that clause 11.2 of the agreement did not establish the 'sole purpose' required by the proviso to section 2(1) of the Credit Agreements Act. The clause imposed a contractual obligation to use the bus in designated ways but expressly allowed for other uses with the seller's written consent, indicating that other purposes were contemplated. Therefore, the agreement was not excluded from the operation of the Act. The court followed the majority in Oosthuizen, requiring the party seeking to rely on the proviso to prove the sole purpose, and found that Dorbyl had n…
Source excerpt
Oosthuizen and Another v Standard Credit Corporation Ltd. (385/91) [1993] ZASCA 59; 1993 (3) SA 891 (AD); [1993] 4 All SA 591 (AD) (14 May 1993)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the lease agreements were subject to the Credit Agreements Act 75 of 1980, as the vehicles fell within the regulated categories and the agreements did not qualify for exemption under section 2(1)(a) or Regulation 4. The court found that the sole purpose of the agreements was not for leasing as contemplated by the Act, and that the respondent's lack of knowledge of the Sampson Beck scheme was irrelevant. The agreements contravened section 6(6) by exceeding the prescribed payment period, and such contravention rendered the agreements invalid, not merely cri…
Source excerpt
Explore more
