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
ABSA Bank Limited v Mashaba and Another (2023/045953) [2025] ZAGPJHC 277 (13 March 2025)
The High Court upheld exceptions to a delict claim based on pure economic loss, finding insufficient pleading of wrongfulness and legal causation, but not damages.
Mtwazi v MEC for Education and Others (472/2020) [2023] ZAECBHC 37 (5 December 2023)
The court found that the plaintiff's particulars of claim, in so far as they relate to the third defendant, failed to set out sufficient material facts to establish a cause of action as required by Rule 18(4) of the Uniform Rules of Court. The allegations in paragraphs 12, 13, and 14 were conclusory and did not provide the necessary factual basis linking the conduct of the third defendant to the damages claimed. The court held that only the paragraphs relating to the third defendant should be set aside, as the first and second defendants had already pleaded and their issues were crystallised.…
Source excerpt
Rapoo v Rustenburg Local Municipality (JA5/18) [2020] ZALAC 5; [2020] 6 BLLR 533 (LAC) (20 February 2020)
Appeal against a Labour Court compensation and damages order failed because the appellant resigned, the discrimination compensation was discretionary, and the damages claim was not properly pleaded.
Matu v Minister of Safety of Security (1115/07) [2008] ZAECHC 69 (29 May 2008)
The court held that paragraph 8.3 of the particulars of claim, when read together with paragraphs 6 and 7, is not vague and embarrassing. The damages claimed are sufficiently linked to the pleaded causes of action, and any uncertainty regarding the apportionment of damages between unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution can be addressed by a request for further particulars for trial. The exception was improperly directed at a subparagraph rather than the whole cause of action, contrary to established legal principles. The court found no embarrassment that would prevent the respondent from p…
Source excerpt
Explore more
