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
Essack N.O v Thangavelu (D9022/2007) [2023] ZAKZDHC 26 (27 March 2023)
The court dismissed a claim to the exclusive use of parking bay P20, holding that no valid notarial cession had transferred the right to the applicant.
Mkhize and Another v Mabija NO (782/1998) [2011] ZAKZDHC 42 (5 May 2011)
The court found that the marriage between the Defendant and Sangqwane, contracted in 1975, was governed by the Black Administration Act and did not result in community of property, as no declaration to that effect was made. The decree of divorce did not order a transfer of ownership of the property to the Defendant, nor did it constitute a redistribution order under section 7(3) of the Divorce Act. The Defendant retained only a personal right of occupation, not ownership. The property was registered in Sangqwane's name, and he was entitled to alienate it. The Plaintiffs, as bona fide purchase…
Source excerpt
Oriental Products (Pty) Ltd v Pegma 178 Investments Trading CC and Others (2011 (2) SA 508 (SCA); [2011] 3 All SA 173 (SCA)) [2010] ZASCA 166; 126/2010 (1 December 2010)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that a fraudulent transfer of immovable property was void, but the owner was estopped from vindicating it due to negligent inaction.
Prophitius and Another v Campbell and Others (7068/06) [2007] ZAKZHC 37; 2008 (3) SA 552 (D); (11 December 2007)
The court held that the abstract system of transfer governs the passing of ownership of immovable property in South African law. Registration in the Deeds Registry is conclusive of ownership, provided the transferee is innocent and has no knowledge of fraud. The applicants obtained transfer first and are innocent parties; therefore, they are the rightful owners. The Trust's fraud does not vitiate the applicants' title, as there is no evidence of their complicity. The subsequent transfers to the third and fourth respondents are set aside, and the Deeds Registry must be amended to reflect the a…
Source excerpt
Lord Investment (Pty) Ltd. v Mocasta Investment (Pty) Ltd. (328/84) [1986] ZASCA 25 (24 March 1986)
The court held that fraudulent transfers could not confer good title, even on a bona fide purchaser, and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Explore more
