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
Makasi and Others v Radebe and Another (2019/29559) [2025] ZAGPJHC 493 (20 May 2025)
The High Court declared the Second Respondent a delinquent director and guilty of an offence under the Companies Act, and dismissed his counter-application.
Association of Mineworkers Construction Union obo Fakude v NI-DA Transport (Pty) Ltd and Others (D788/2019) [2025] ZALCD 19 (19 May 2025)
The court found that at least 58 employees properly tendered their services within the ten-day period stipulated in the certified arbitration award. The respondents' challenge to the authenticity of the tender list was unpersuasive, and the director's authority to enforce compliance was reasonably inferred and unchallenged. The respondents' obligation to reinstate crystallized after the exhaustion of all legal remedies, specifically after the Constitutional Court dismissed their appeal. Their failure to take proactive steps to reinstate employees post-appeal constituted wilful non-compliance…
Source excerpt
Mahanyelo N.O and Others v Venter (116098/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 496 (16 May 2025)
The court found that the plaintiffs' particulars of claim contain all the necessary averments to sustain a cause of action against the defendant. The allegations provide sufficient detail regarding the liquidation, the defendant's role as director, and the alleged fraudulent conduct. The defendant's complaints relate to facta probantia (evidence) rather than facta probanda (material facts required to be pleaded). The court accepted the pleaded facts as true and held that, on any reasonable interpretation, the particulars of claim disclose a cause of action. The exception was therefore dismiss…
Source excerpt
Delta Property Fund Limited v Nomvete and Others (21/58226) [2025] ZAGPJHC 64 (21 January 2025)
High Court held three former Delta directors delinquent for serious misconduct, rejected a pactum de non petendo defence, and ordered damages and costs.
Efficient Lubrication (Pty) Ltd and Others v Small Enterprise Finance Agency SOC Limited (2023-092722) [2025] ZAGPPHC 73 (6 January 2025)
The High Court partly upheld an exception, striking out the section 77 Companies Act claim but dismissing the remaining objections to the pleadings.
Badenhorst v De Kock (13372/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 427; [2025] 1 All SA 597 (WCC); 2025 (4) SA 540 (WCC) (18 December 2024)
The High Court held a sole director personally liable under section 424 for a company debt incurred recklessly, but limited the amount to the sum in the court order.
Smuts v Kromelboog Conservation Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (511/2023) [2024] ZASCA 156 (14 November 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that Dr Smuts, as sole director of Kromelboog, engaged in serious misconduct by clearing company funds, authorising payments and donations for personal benefit, causing the company to pay legal fees for his own litigation, and attempting to usurp company operations. These actions were taken while the company was insolvent and without shareholder approval, in clear breach of statutory duties and fiduciary obligations. The court held that Dr Smuts acted in a conflicted position, grossly abused his position as director, and inflicted harm on Kromelboog. The cond…
Source excerpt
Lang v ABSA Bank and Others (079773/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 891 (11 September 2024)
The applicant, Brett Lang, failed to establish locus standi on any of the grounds advanced. As an unrehabilitated insolvent, he lacked the legal capacity to litigate without the trustee's consent and was neither a current director nor shareholder of the companies in question. His reliance on public interest standing under section 38 of the Constitution was unsubstantiated, as he did not demonstrate a sufficient connection to the rights asserted beyond his personal grievance. The relief sought was hypothetical, academic, and framed as a moral judgment rather than a legal determination, lacking…
Source excerpt
A and H Specialised Services (Pty) Ltd v Bezuidenhout and Others (23240/2021) [2024] ZAGPPHC 545 (7 June 2024)
The High Court dismissed an exception to particulars of claim in a misappropriation dispute, finding the pleading sufficiently specific and Rule 30 the proper remedy for defects.
Venator Africa (Pty) Ltd v Watts and Another (053/2023) [2024] ZASCA 60; 2024 (4) SA 539 (SCA) (24 April 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 218(2) of the Companies Act does not create a general right of action against directors for losses suffered by creditors due to reckless trading by the company. Section 22(1) imposes duties on the company, not its directors, and liability for directors is specifically regulated by section 77(3)(b), which provides for liability to the company itself. The appellant failed to identify any provision of the Act breached by the directors that would trigger liability under section 218(2). The Court rejected the reasoning in Rabinowitz and related cases,…
Source excerpt
Explore more
