South Africa Case Law

Medtronic (Africa) (Pty) Limited v Capital Endovascular (Pty) Limited and Another (2022/046095)

Medtronic (Africa) (Pty) Limited v Capital Endovascular (Pty) Limited and Another (2022/046095) [2025] ZAGPJHC 745 (5 August 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/046095

Judge

Adams

The court found that the true intention of the parties, as evidenced by the settlement negotiations and correspondence, was to settle for R48 million plus VAT. The reference to R32 million in words in the written agreement was a typographical error and did not reflect the parties' agreement. The authority of Mr Moodley to conclude the agreement was established by a power of attorney, and any alleged private instructions did not affect his authority as far as the applicant was concerned. The arbitral award was valid and enforceable, and the applicant was entitled to have it made an order of co…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act 42 Of 1965
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Interpretation Of Contracts
• Rectification
• Specific Performance

African Rainbow Minerals Ltd v Tam Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023-097235)

African Rainbow Minerals Ltd v Tam Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (2023-097235) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1332 (19 December 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023-097235

Judge

Meaden

The High Court made an arbitral award an order of court, rejecting a late challenge that the award was a nullity and awarding punitive costs.

• Arbitration Act Section 31
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Waiver Of Time Limits
• Joint Venture Dispute
• Public Policy Challenge
• Arbitration

Kesef Properties Pty Limited v Weinberg and Others (2021/26466)

Kesef Properties Pty Limited v Weinberg and Others (2021/26466) [2024] ZAGPJHC 692 (26 July 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/26466

Judge

C Bester

The court found no evidence of misconduct or gross irregularity by the arbitrator. The arbitrator acted within his discretion under the AFSA Rules to manage the proceedings efficiently and fairly. Kesef had ample opportunity to participate, including briefing alternative counsel, but elected not to do so and instead pursued parallel litigation. The arbitrator's prior involvement in related matters was disclosed and did not constitute bias or grounds for recusal. The arbitration agreement was valid and encompassed all disputes, including allegations of repudiation, which were properly before t…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act Section 33
• Arbitral Bias
• Repudiation Of Arbitration Agreement
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Stay Of Enforcement
• Audi Alteram Partem

Krohne (Pty) Ltd v Strategic Fuel Fund Association (476/2023)

Krohne (Pty) Ltd v Strategic Fuel Fund Association (476/2023) [2024] ZASCA 99 (14 June 2024)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

476/2023

Judges

Nicholls, Mothle, Molefe, Smith, Mbhele

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the high court erred in dismissing the appellant's claim on a point in limine. The parties had agreed in the interim award that the findings of the independent expert would be final and binding. The SGS report constituted the cause of action, and the appellant's claim was founded on that report. The high court misconstrued the issue by focusing on the validity of the interim award rather than whether the SGS report satisfied the agreed condition precedent for payment. The interim award, as defined by the Arbitration Act, was valid, and the settlement agre…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act 42 Of 1965
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Settlement Agreement
• Expert Determination
• Cause Of Action
• Interim Award

Instelec Services CC and Another v Ideal Electrical and Mining Supplies (Pty) Ltd and Others (25450/2020;13856/2020)

Instelec Services CC and Another v Ideal Electrical and Mining Supplies (Pty) Ltd and Others (25450/2020;13856/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 6 (4 January 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

25450/2020;13856/2020

Judge

Fisher

The High Court refused condonation and dismissed a review of an arbitration ruling, finding the late challenge unjustified and the refusal of further documents proper.

• Arbitration Review
• Condonation
• Gross Irregularity
• Admission Of Evidence
• Punitive Costs
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award

Mabra Construction (Pty) Limited v Ecolab (Pty) Limited (51998/2021)

Mabra Construction (Pty) Limited v Ecolab (Pty) Limited (51998/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 660 (8 August 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

51998/2021

Judge

Yende

The court made an arbitration award an order of court and rejected points in limine including res judicata, lis pendens, locus standi, and jurisdiction.

• Arbitration Act Section 31
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Res Judicata
• Lis Pendens
• Locus Standi
• Arbitration

Gometis (Pty) Ltd v Fountainhead Property Trust and Others (16959/21 ; 1829/21)

Gometis (Pty) Ltd v Fountainhead Property Trust and Others (16959/21 ; 1829/21) [2023] ZAGPJHC 864 (4 August 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

16959/21 ; 1829/21

Judge

L.T. Modiba

The court refused condonation for the late filing of the review application, finding that Gometis failed to provide a full explanation for the delay and lacked prospects of success. The grounds advanced by Gometis—misapplication of the law on onus and duty to begin, acceptance of inadmissible evidence, and alleged bias—were found not to constitute reviewable grounds under section 33(1) of the Arbitration Act. Errors of law are not reviewable unless they result in misconduct or gross irregularity, which was not established. The court held that section 34 of the Constitution does not apply to p…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act Review
• Condonation
• Onus And Duty To Begin
• Bias And Misconduct
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award

Krohne (Pty) Limited v Strategic Fuel Fund Association (2019/43316)

Krohne (Pty) Limited v Strategic Fuel Fund Association (2019/43316) [2023] ZAGPJHC 398 (28 April 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2019/43316

Judge

B.C. Wanless

The High Court granted Krohne leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal in a dispute over enforcement of an arbitral award and related costs.

• Leave To Appeal
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Interpretation Of Award
• Costs Order
• Leave-to-appeal
• Arbitral-awards

Vodacom Group Limited v Congolese Wireless Network SARL and Another (30053/2020)

Vodacom Group Limited v Congolese Wireless Network SARL and Another (30053/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 793 (7 December 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

30053/2020

Judge

Booysen

High Court decision enforcing arbitral awards under the Arbitration Act and rejecting a de bonis propriis costs award against an attorney who was not a party to the arbitration.

• Arbitration Act 42 Of 1965
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Jurisdiction Of Arbitrator
• Costs De Bonis Propriis
• Attorney Liability
• Arbitration Agreement Scope

Industrius D.O.O v IDS Industry Service and Plant Construction South Africa (Pty) Ltd (15862/2020)

Industrius D.O.O v IDS Industry Service and Plant Construction South Africa (Pty) Ltd (15862/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 528 (13 October 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

15862/2020

Judge

Senyatsi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects that another court would differ from the judgment refusing to stay execution of the arbitral award. The counterclaim raised by the respondent was considered res judicata, as it had already been addressed by the arbitrator in the arbitral award. Furthermore, any remedies sought regarding the enforcement of the arbitral award should have been pursued under the International Arbitration Act and Model Law, which the applicant did not do. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal was refused.

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• International Arbitration Act
• Model Law Application
• Stay Of Execution