South Africa Case Law

Dr Ruth Segomotsi Mompati District Municipality v Izwelethu Cemforce CC (M509/22)

Dr Ruth Segomotsi Mompati District Municipality v Izwelethu Cemforce CC (M509/22) [2025] ZANWHC 44 (28 February 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M509/22

Judge

A Reddy

The Court found that the relief sought by the Municipality is procedural and not substantive, and that the interests of justice require the proceedings to be stayed pending the final determination of the related review and adjudication actions. The Court emphasized its inherent power under section 173 of the Constitution to regulate its own process and protect the integrity of the judicial system. The stay is justified because the underlying disputes regarding the contract and adjudication award are unresolved, and proceeding with enforcement could result in inconsistent outcomes. The respond…

Source excerpt

• Stay Of Proceedings
• Enforcement Of Adjudication Award
• Contractual Dispute
• Interests Of Justice

Tek-cent Glass & Aluminium (Pty) Ltd v Belo & Kies Construction (Pty) Ltd (16580/2021)

Tek-cent Glass & Aluminium (Pty) Ltd v Belo & Kies Construction (Pty) Ltd (16580/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 126 (22 February 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

16580/2021

Judge

Mbongwe

The High Court enforced a JBCC adjudication award, rejecting the respondent’s late notice of dissatisfaction and jurisdictional objections.

• Enforcement Of Adjudication Award
• Construction Contracts
• Jbcc Subcontract Agreement
• Notice Of Dissatisfaction
• Arbitration Procedure
• Adjudication-award-enforcement

Quantibuild (Pty) Ltd v Ngaka Modiri Molema District Municipality (3352/2019)

Quantibuild (Pty) Ltd v Ngaka Modiri Molema District Municipality (3352/2019) [2021] ZANWHC 39 (2 March 2021)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

3352/2019

Judge

Makoti M Z

The defendant failed to provide a genuine and bona fide defence to the plaintiff's claim for payment under the contract and adjudication award. The contract, presumed valid until set aside by a court, was not challenged timeously by the defendant, and the counter-claim to review and set aside the contract was instituted after unreasonable delay without explanation. The defendant participated in the adjudication process and did not challenge the award, which is binding and enforceable. The defence based on illegality and lack of authority does not avail the defendant, as the contract's validit…

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Enforcement Of Adjudication Award
• Public Procurement Legality
• Contract Enforceability
• Counter Claim Delay