South Africa Case Law

Body Corporate of La Mon Villa and Another v Niyakha Group (Pty) Ltd (Appeal) (A27/2023)

Body Corporate of La Mon Villa and Another v Niyakha Group (Pty) Ltd (Appeal) (A27/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 757 (23 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A27/2023

Judges

Lenyai, Mudau, Baqwa

The court found that the first appellant, as body corporate, is statutorily empowered under section 2(7)(b) of the STSMA to institute action against the developer for damages to the common property arising from defective construction. The particulars of claim set out the essential elements of a delictual claim, including the existence of a legal duty, breach, causation, and damages. The respondent's arguments regarding the sufficiency of the pleadings and the alleged misjoinder of the second appellant were rejected. The second appellant was found to have no cause of action and was joined only…

Source excerpt

• Sectional Title Scheme Management Act
• Defective Construction
• Exception Procedure
• Legal Duty Of Developer
• Wrongfulness
• Pleading Requirements

Sabi River Share Block (Pty) Ltd t/a Sabi River Sun Resort v Gold Data Holdings (Pty) Ltd (22755/23)

Sabi River Share Block (Pty) Ltd t/a Sabi River Sun Resort v Gold Data Holdings (Pty) Ltd (22755/23) [2025] ZAWCHC 298 (21 July 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

22755/23

Judge

Njokweni

The High Court dismissed an exception and Rule 30 application attacking breach of contract pleadings, finding the objections technical, prejudicial, and an abuse of process.

• Exception Procedure
• Breach Of Contract
• Pleading Requirements
• Irregular Step
• Contractual Damages
• Attorney And Client Costs

Northern Cape Livestock Vryburg Co-op Ltd v Grootbos Voerkrale (Pty) Ltd and Another (1880/2023)

Northern Cape Livestock Vryburg Co-op Ltd v Grootbos Voerkrale (Pty) Ltd and Another (1880/2023) [2025] ZANWHC 117 (14 July 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

1880/2023

Judge

Oosthuizen-Senekal

The High Court upheld an exception to amended particulars of claim, finding the damages pleading too vague to assess, and gave the plaintiffs 20 days to amend.

• Vague And Embarrassing Pleading
• Quantification Of Damages
• Rule 18 Uniform Rules
• Exception Procedure
• Delictual Liability
• Commercial Loss

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others v Nu-Way Housing Development Limited (050803/2022)

City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Others v Nu-Way Housing Development Limited (050803/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 691 (27 June 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

050803/2022

Judge

Retief

High Court decision on a late Rule 30 application and exceptions against pleadings in a property and unlawful occupation dispute.

• Exception Procedure
• Vague And Embarrassing Pleading
• Statutory Obligations Under Housing Act
• Constitutional Damages
• Unlawful Occupation
• Amendment Of Pleadings

Estabiz (Pty) Ltd v Starflash (Pty) Ltd (Appeal) (CIV APP MG32/24)

Estabiz (Pty) Ltd v Starflash (Pty) Ltd (Appeal) (CIV APP MG32/24) [2025] ZANWHC 108 (26 June 2025)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CIV APP MG32/24

Judges

Reddy, Maodi

The High Court upheld an appeal against an exception, holding the pleadings and attached agreement sufficiently disclosed a cause of action.

• Exception Procedure
• Contractual Validity
• Tacit Terms
• Quasi Mutual Assent
• Pleading Requirements
• Civil-procedure

Barloworld Motor Retail South Africa, a Division of Barloworld South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Badger Holdings South Africa (Pty) Ltd (previously known as African Independent Brokers (Pty) Ltd) and Another (12223/2024)

Barloworld Motor Retail South Africa, a Division of Barloworld South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Badger Holdings South Africa (Pty) Ltd (previously known as African Independent Brokers (Pty) Ltd) and Another (12223/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 313 (25 June 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

12223/2024

Judge

N. Mangcu-Lockwood

The High Court dismissed Barloworld’s exception to Dotsure’s special pleas and plea on the merits, holding the issues were interpretative and not properly decided on exception.

• Exception Procedure
• Pleading Requirements
• Contract Interpretation
• Agency
• Cession Of Rights
• Exception-procedure

Solidarity obo Van Schalkwyk v University of South Africa (JS668/24)

Solidarity obo Van Schalkwyk v University of South Africa (JS668/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 239 (19 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS668/24

Judge

A Anestidis

The Labour Court dismissed UNISA’s exception to a claim for unpaid incentive payments, finding the plaintiffs had adequately pleaded a contractual cause of action.

• Contract Of Employment
• Exception Procedure
• Section 77 3 Bcea
• Employment Policy Incorporation
• Vague And Embarrassing Pleading
• Labour-law

Dewlal v Cebra Lancet RSA (Pty) Ltd (JS685/24)

Dewlal v Cebra Lancet RSA (Pty) Ltd (JS685/24) [2025] ZALCJHB 236 (18 June 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS685/24

Judge

W Kruger

The court found that the Respondent's exception was not an irregular step under Rule 57, as the procedural requirements for notice only apply to exceptions based on vagueness and embarrassment, which was not the case here. The Applicant failed to demonstrate any procedural irregularity by the Respondent. On the merits, the Applicant's statement of case did not disclose a cause of action, as it relied solely on a confidentiality clause without specifying the breached terms. The Applicant did not plead the requirements for interdictory relief and sought damages not recognised in South African l…

Source excerpt

• Mutual Separation Agreement
• Confidentiality Clause
• Exception Procedure
• Interdictory Relief
• Damages In Lieu Of Specific Performance

ABSA Bank (Pty) Ltd v Xatasi (2024/052931)

ABSA Bank (Pty) Ltd v Xatasi (2024/052931) [2025] ZAGPJHC 567 (13 June 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/052931

Judge

E Dreyer

The High Court upheld an exception because the plaintiff failed to plead a recognisable contractual cause of action against ABSA Bank.

• Exception Procedure
• Breach Of Contract
• Pleading Requirements
• Reckless Lending
• Exception-procedure
• Pleading-requirements

Astron Energy (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (20306/2022)

Astron Energy (Pty) Ltd v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (20306/2022) [2025] ZAWCHC 245 (9 June 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

20306/2022

Judge

Moosa AJ

The High Court dismissed SARS’s exceptions to Astron Energy’s combined customs tariff appeal and PAJA review, with costs, holding the pleading was sufficiently framed.

• Customs And Excise Act
• Tariff Determination Appeal
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Exception Procedure
• Internal Administrative Appeal
• Judicial Review