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
Sekoati v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd and Others (36232/2013) [2025] ZAGPPHC 198 (24 February 2025)
The High Court held that summons was not validly served after the deceased’s chosen domicilium lapsed, rendering the default judgment and later sale in execution invalid.
Tusk Financial Services (Pty) Ltd and Another v 87 Civil (Pty) Ltd (18392/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 314 (16 October 2024)
The court found that the applicants had complied with all statutory and procedural requirements for service and the application for provisional liquidation. Service at the respondent's registered address, which also served as its domicilium address, was valid and effective under the Uniform Rules and the Companies Act. The respondent's explanation for not receiving notice was found to be inadequate and unsupported by affidavit evidence from its directors. The respondent failed to provide a substantive reason for postponement and did not dispute its indebtedness. The court held that the respon…
Source excerpt
Oliphant v Standard Bank (South Africa) Limited and Another (2023/061498) [2024] ZAGPJHC 885 (5 September 2024)
The High Court refused to rescind a default judgment, holding that service on the applicant’s chosen domicilium at the sole entrance gate was effective.
AFHCO Calgro M3 Consortium (Pty) Limited v Maphanga and Another (22-13020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 229 (4 March 2024)
The court found that the lease agreement was validly cancelled after the First Respondent failed to remedy his breach following written notice delivered by hand at the chosen domicilium. The lease agreement, when interpreted in a business-like manner, does not require exclusive service by post, and hand delivery at the agreed address is sufficient. The First Respondent's defence of withholding rental due to alleged non-performance is expressly precluded by the lease terms. The court considered the personal circumstances of the First Respondent and found that he had sufficient time and means t…
Source excerpt
Standard Bank of South Africa v Phillip and Another (43590/2019) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1858 (30 October 2023)
The High Court granted summary judgment to Standard Bank, rectified a mistaken domicilium address in the loan agreement, and declared the property specially executable.
Salestalk 598 (Pty) Ltd v Giant Eagle Trading CC (2021/53855) [2023] ZAGPJHC 599 (17 May 2023)
The court found that the respondent had materially complied with the requirements of clause 2.2 of the lease agreement by sending written notice of its intention to renew via WhatsApp and email to a director of the applicant prior to the expiry of the lease. The applicant's denial of receipt was unsupported by direct evidence and amounted to hearsay, as no confirmatory affidavit from the director was provided. The court held that the domicilium citandi clause did not preclude valid notice by other means if receipt was proven. There was no genuine dispute of fact regarding the sending and rece…
Source excerpt
Sibeko vs Shackleton Credit Management (Pty)Ltd and Another (3664/2015) [2022] ZAGPJHC 1036 (21 December 2022)
Rescission of a default judgment was refused after the court found service at the chosen domicilium was valid and the defence of prescription failed.
Tshavhungwe v Fast Issuer Spy (RF) Ltd (2674/21) [2022] ZAGPPHC 8 (10 January 2022)
The court found that the initial service of summons at an incorrect domicilium citandi et executandi was an irregular step, but the respondent remedied the irregularity by amending the summons and re-serving it at the correct address. The applicant failed to demonstrate any prejudice resulting from the irregular service or the subsequent re-service. Technical objections without prejudice do not warrant setting aside proceedings. The application for costs de bonis propriis against the respondent's attorney was abandoned and found to be unnecessary. The applicant's conduct in pursuing the appli…
Source excerpt
Motloung v Meyersdal Nature Estate Homeowners Association (NPC) (40411/2016) [2021] ZAGPJHC 477 (28 September 2021)
The court found that, although service at a chosen domicilium address is generally valid, the respondent was aware from previous proceedings that service at the applicant's domicilium address was unlikely to come to his attention. The respondent failed to take additional steps or use alternate methods of service, despite having access to other addresses for the applicant. As a result, service was not effective, and the default judgment was granted erroneously. The applicant acted within a reasonable time upon learning of the judgment and was entitled to rescission under Rule 42. The applicati…
Source excerpt
LLR Properties (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sasfin Bank Ltd and Another (2020/10763) [2021] ZAGPJHC 870 (24 May 2021)
The court found that the applicants' denials and averments regarding the alleged fraud and lack of knowledge of the agreements were unacceptably bald and unsupported by any plausible explanation or detail, both in the founding and replying affidavits. The applicants failed to provide any substantive account of the circumstances surrounding the signing of the agreements, the installation of equipment, or the monthly debit orders paid from their account. The court held that, in light of the detailed evidence provided by the respondents and the absence of any meaningful response or supporting af…
Source excerpt
Explore more
