Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2023] ZAGPJHC 450

L.G v J.G (32377/2012)

L.G v J.G (32377/2012) [2023] ZAGPJHC 450 (28 April 2023)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
32377/2012
Judge
Windell

The High Court held that Uniform Rule 49(13) is peremptory and obliges an appellant to provide security for costs pending an appeal to the Full Court unless the respondent waives security or the appellant is released from the obligation by the court. The court rejected the respondent's argument that only the SCA can order security when it grants leave to appeal to the Full Court, finding that Rule 49(13) governs all Full Court appeals in the High Court, regardless of which court granted leave. The court interpreted Rule 49(13) and SCA Rule 9 harmoniously, concluding that SCA Rule 9 applies on…

Source excerpt

  • Security For Costs
  • Uniform Rules Of Court
  • Appeal Procedure
  • Rule 49 13
  • Rule 47
  • Enforcement Of Costs Orders
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2020] ZAKZDHC 41

N.H obo E.R.H v Schindlers Lifts SA (Pty) Limited and Another (7914/2018)

N.H obo E.R.H v Schindlers Lifts SA (Pty) Limited and Another (7914/2018) [2020] ZAKZDHC 41 (1 September 2020)

Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
7914/2018
Judge
Vahed

The court held that the starting point is that a peregrinus should furnish security for costs, and this is unaffected by Magida. The representative capacity of the plaintiff is irrelevant to the obligation to provide security. The plaintiff failed to provide cogent evidence that she or her family could not provide security. The settlement with the second defendant demonstrated that the plaintiff could raise some funds. The first defendant's offer of R350,000 as security was reasonable and within the plaintiff's reach. The court exercised its discretion to order the plaintiff to provide securi…

Source excerpt

  • Security For Costs
  • Peregrinus Vs Incola
  • Judicial Discretion
  • Representative Capacity
  • Enforcement Of Costs Orders
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.