South Africa Case Law

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Ndlovu and Others (GP 19/2021)

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Ndlovu and Others (GP 19/2021) [2022] ZAST 12 (7 June 2022)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

GP 19/2021

Judge

L.T. Modiba

The Special Tribunal set aside unlawful NHLS PPE procurement, ordered repayment on enrichment grounds, declared preserved assets forfeit, and awarded punitive costs.

• Public Procurement Irregularity
• Condictio Ob Turpem Vel Inustam Causam
• Forfeiture Of Assets
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Enrichment Claims
• Emergency Procurement Procedures

Bester N.O. and Others v Quintado 120 (Pty) Ltd (CCT160/21)

Bester N.O. and Others v Quintado 120 (Pty) Ltd (CCT160/21) [2021] ZACC 49; 2022 (11) BCLR 1389 (CC) (13 December 2021)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 160/21

Judges

Madlanga, Madondo, Majiedt, Mhlantla, Pillay, Rogers, Theron, Tlaletsi, Tshiqi

The Constitutional Court held that its jurisdiction was not engaged because the applicants failed to establish a constitutional issue or an arguable point of law of general public importance. The 'directing mind' doctrine is already recognised as flexible and pragmatic in South African law, and the applicants' arguments for further development were unsupported by any infringement of constitutional rights. The matter turned on factual disputes regarding enrichment and creditor standing, which are not suitable for determination by the Constitutional Court. The application for leave to appeal wa…

Source excerpt

• Company Liquidation
• Creditor Standing
• Directing Mind Doctrine
• Enrichment Claims
• Development Of Common Law

Jacaranda Haven (Pty) Ltd and Another v JJP Propco (Pty) Ltd and Others (Leave to Appeal) (37063/2018; 45201/2018)

Jacaranda Haven (Pty) Ltd and Another v JJP Propco (Pty) Ltd and Others (Leave to Appeal) (37063/2018; 45201/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 24 (22 January 2021)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

37063/2018; 45201/2018

Judge

N Davis

The High Court refused leave to appeal against a final liquidation order and associated costs order, finding no reasonable prospects of success.

• Leave To Appeal
• Company Liquidation
• Just And Equitable Ground
• Costs Orders
• Enrichment Claims
• Leave-to-appeal

Special Investigating Unit v Chauke Quantity Surveyors & Project Management in association with listed entities and Others (45529/16)

Special Investigating Unit v Chauke Quantity Surveyors & Project Management in association with listed entities and Others (45529/16) [2020] ZAGPJHC 257 (27 October 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

45529/16

Judge

P.A. Meyer

The court found that the contract between the Department of Public Works and the consortium contemplated that the scope of work and project cost would be determined after the award of the tender, and that percentage-based fees would be paid accordingly. The increase in scope and cost was authorised by the Department through instructions and approvals at various stages, and the consortium acted on these instructions. The applicant failed to establish that the increase was unauthorised or that any breach occurred that would render the contract void ab initio. The court held that contract law do…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement
• Contractual Invalidity
• Scope Of Work Variation
• Declaratory Relief
• Enrichment Claims

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa v Sbahle Fire Services CC (230/2019)

Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa v Sbahle Fire Services CC (230/2019) [2020] ZASCA 90 (4 August 2020)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

230/2019

Judges

Petse, Mbha, Mocumie, Dlodlo, Mabindla-Boqwana

The SCA held that Sbahle failed to prove contractual entitlement to extra safety consultancy fees, but PRASA also failed to prove repayment of paid fire consultancy fees.

• Contract Interpretation
• Breach Of Contract
• Consultancy Fees
• Condictio Indebiti
• Enrichment Claims
• Contract-interpretation

Bethlehem and Others v Zwiegers and Another (43334/2018)

Bethlehem and Others v Zwiegers and Another (43334/2018) [2020] ZAGPJHC 112 (7 May 2020)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

43334/2018

Judge

Lapan

The court found that the applicants, having acquired the property at a sale in execution and complied with all conditions of sale, became the 'persons in charge' entitled to possession prior to registration of ownership. The respondent's claim that the property was res litigiosa failed, as the doctrine does not prevent transfer but only subjects the transferee's rights to the outcome of pending litigation. The respondent's improvement lien defence was rejected because he was not in possession of the property when improvements were made, a prerequisite for asserting such a lien. Furthermore, t…

Source excerpt

• Eviction Under Pie Act
• Res Litigiosa
• Improvement Lien
• Standing Of Person In Charge
• Enrichment Claims

Van der Merwe NO and Others v Keystone Development CC and Others (70881/2017)

Van der Merwe NO and Others v Keystone Development CC and Others (70881/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 461 (22 August 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

70881/2017

Judge

T Siwendu

The court found that the sale agreement contained all essential terms required by law, including the identification of the land, the purchase price, and the method for escalation and payment. The suspensive condition did not invalidate the contract but merely suspended its operation until fulfillment. As no time period for fulfillment was stipulated, the condition was to be fulfilled within a reasonable time. The applicants did not pursue cancellation based on breach or lapse of reasonable time, but rather on alleged invalidity, which the court rejected. The contract was held to be valid and…

Source excerpt

• Alienation Of Land Act
• Suspensive Conditions
• Formalities Of Contract
• Property Development Agreements
• Contract Cancellation
• Enrichment Claims

L v L (26758/2014)

L v L (26758/2014) [2017] ZAGPPHC 895 (7 December 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

26758/2014

Judge

DP de Villiers

The High Court dismissed an amendment application in divorce proceedings, finding the proposed enrichment and damages allegations would render the pleading excipiable.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Divorce Proceedings
• Matrimonial Property Act
• Enrichment Claims
• Damages Claims
• Amendment-of-pleadings

Basenzi Construction CC t/a Power Wheel and Tyre and Another v Hofmil Investments (Pty) Ltd Hofmil 4 (Warehouse) (3573/2016)

Basenzi Construction CC t/a Power Wheel and Tyre and Another v Hofmil Investments (Pty) Ltd Hofmil 4 (Warehouse) (3573/2016) [2017] ZAGPPHC 848 (10 November 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

3573/2016

Judge

Van der Schyff

The High Court refused condonation for a late rescission application, finding no adequate explanation for delay and no bona fide defence to default judgment.

• Condonation
• Rescission Of Default Judgment
• Lease Agreement
• Building Regulations
• Enrichment Claims
• Rescission-of-default-judgment

Mgadi v Calu and Another (1559/16)

Mgadi v Calu and Another (1559/16) [2017] ZAECMHC 14 (13 June 2017)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

1559/16

Judge

S M Mbenenge

Executor succeeded in a rei vindicatio for return of a minibus. The first respondent failed to prove a lien for alleged repair and maintenance expenses.

• Rei Vindicatio
• Possessory Lien
• Executor Powers
• Enrichment Claims
• Rei-vindicatio
• Possessory-lien