South Africa Case Law

Shabalala v S (AR332/2023)

Shabalala v S (AR332/2023) [2024] ZAKZPHC 114; 2025 (1) SACR 201 (KZP) (29 November 2024)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR332/2023

Judges

Nkosi, Ngqanda, Gajoo

The appeal was dismissed as the trial court had considered all material evidence, including the affidavit of MEC Mabuyakhulu, either directly or through corroborating sources. The additions to the final judgment were found to be explanations and did not undermine the appellant's right to a fair trial. The trial court's credibility findings were justified based on the evidence, and the elements of fraud and corruption were correctly applied. The appellant's failure to disclose his relationship with Dr Savoi and the benefit he stood to acquire for himself and the ANC was material to the offence…

Source excerpt

• Fraud
• Corruption
• Money Laundering
• Public Finance Management Act
• Minimum Sentencing
• Documentary Evidence

Sheffrk v MEC for Police, Road and Transport Free State Province (4603/2015)

Sheffrk v MEC for Police, Road and Transport Free State Province (4603/2015) [2022] ZAFSHC 142 (3 June 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4603/2015

Judge

Opperman

The High Court refused to admit discovered letters as hearsay on the merits of a civil trial, but allowed them as real evidence for the costs inquiry.

• Admissibility Of Hearsay Evidence
• Documentary Evidence
• Opinion Evidence
• Law Of Evidence Amendment Act
• Costs In Civil Procedure
• Admissibility-of-hearsay-evidence

Griekwaland Wes Korporatief Beperk v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (396/19)

Griekwaland Wes Korporatief Beperk v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (396/19) [2020] ZASCA 10 (19 March 2020)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

396/19

Judges

Navsa, Molemela, Plasket, Ledwaba, Gorven

The Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed an ownership claim to 306 beef calves because the appellant failed to prove, with admissible evidence, that it owned the attached animals.

• Ownership Of Movable Property
• Agency Relationship
• Documentary Evidence
• Onus Of Proof
• Ownership-of-movable-property
• Onus-of-proof

Competition Commission Roadspan Surfaces (Pty) Ltd and Another (CR163Nov16)

Competition Commission Roadspan Surfaces (Pty) Ltd and Another (CR163Nov16) [2019] ZACT 72 (25 July 2019)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

CR163Nov16

Judges

Norman Manoim, Yasmin Carrim, Andreas Wessels

The Tribunal dismissed a Competition Commission complaint alleging a 2008 market-division agreement between Roadspan Surfaces and Much Asphalt in Gauteng.

• Horizontal Agreements
• Market Division
• Section 4 1 B Ii
• Burden Of Proof
• Documentary Evidence
• Competition-law

Witbooi v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2400/13)

Witbooi v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR2400/13) [2018] ZALCJHB 90; [2018] 7 BLLR 730 (LC); (2018) 39 ILJ 1852 (LC) (23 February 2018)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR2400/13

Judge

GN Moshoana

The court found that the applicant's representative was aware of the need to call Dr Minuer and chose not to do so, thus the commissioner was not obliged to intervene or assist further. The helping hand principle was not applicable in circumstances where the party is represented and understands the process. The commissioner correctly warned about the limited weight of documentary evidence without oral testimony, and the decision to dismiss for incapacity was reasonable given the applicant's inability to meet the job profile and failed attempts at accommodation. No reviewable irregularity occu…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Dismissal
• Incapacity Dismissal
• Helping Hand Principle
• Reasonableness Test
• Documentary Evidence
• Arbitration Review

Griekwaland Wes Korpratief Limited v Canon Garth Limited (1100/2015)

Griekwaland Wes Korpratief Limited v Canon Garth Limited (1100/2015) [2018] ZANCHC 1 (26 January 2018)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1100/2015

Judge

Mamosebo

The High Court granted leave to appeal, finding reasonable prospects of success on the interpretation of emails and documentary evidence about a payment agreement.

• Leave To Appeal
• Contractual Interpretation
• Documentary Evidence
• Leave-to-appeal
• Contractual-interpretation
• Documentary-evidence

South African Social Security Agency v NEHAWU obo Punzi and Others (C233/14)

South African Social Security Agency v NEHAWU obo Punzi and Others (C233/14) [2015] ZALCCT 35; (2015) 36 ILJ 2345 (LC) (30 April 2015)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C233/14

Judge

Rabkin-Naicker

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside an arbitration award decided only on papers, holding that a stated case or oral evidence was required.

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Precautionary Suspension
• Arbitration Review
• Stated Case
• Documentary Evidence
• Labour-law

Director of Public Prosecutions South Gauteng v Van Der Linde (A401/11)

Director of Public Prosecutions South Gauteng v Van Der Linde (A401/11) [2013] ZAGPJHC 328 (12 December 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A401/11

Judges

B H Mbha, L Mdalana

The court found that the learned magistrate failed to properly apply the test under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act by disregarding substantial unchallenged evidence implicating the respondent in a large-scale VAT fraud scheme. The rejection of documentary evidence solely because they were copies was a misdirection, as statutory provisions and case law permit the use of duplicates where originals are unavailable and authenticity is established. The court held that section 310 does not violate the constitutional protection against double jeopardy, as the respondent had not testified…

Source excerpt

• Section 174 Discharge
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Double Jeopardy
• Vat Fraud
• Documentary Evidence
• Constitutional Rights

Competition Commission v Allen Meshco (Proprietary) Limited and Others (09/CR/Jan07)

Competition Commission v Allen Meshco (Proprietary) Limited and Others (09/CR/Jan07) [2008] ZACT 59; [2008] 2 CPLR 330 (CT) (23 July 2008)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

09/CR/Jan07

Judges

N Manoim, Y Carrim, L Reyburn

The Tribunal dismissed the respondents’ points in limine, holding that the referral period had been validly extended and the complaint had not lapsed.

• Referral Period Extension
• Points In Limine
• Section 50 Competition Act
• Documentary Evidence
• Oral Consent
• Competition-law

Pasiya v Paterson and Others (2295/06 , 40/2006)

Pasiya v Paterson and Others (2295/06 , 40/2006) [2006] ZAECHC 42 (4 September 2006)

Court

High Courts - Eastern Cape

Case number

2295/06

Judge

C. Plasket

The High Court refused an urgent interdict against the sale of Bush Bucks Football Club, finding Trendmania 4 (Pty) Ltd was probably the owner and ordering punitive costs.

• Interim Interdict
• Ownership Dispute
• Liquidation Proceedings
• Professional Sports Club
• Documentary Evidence
• Punitive Costs