South Africa Case Law

Harbour Town Homeowners Association NPC v Viba (2022/046219)

Harbour Town Homeowners Association NPC v Viba (2022/046219) [2025] ZAGPJHC 736 (23 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/046219

Judge

Aucamp

The court held that in the context of a homeowners association established as a non-profit company, membership arises automatically upon transfer of property, as stipulated in the title deed and the association's memorandum of incorporation. The particulars of claim need only allege that the defendant became a member by virtue of these conditions and defaulted on levy payments. The formal entry of the defendant's name in the register of members is a procedural formality and not a prerequisite for establishing membership or liability for levies. The exception raised by the defendant, based on…

Source excerpt

• Homeowners Association Liability
• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Levy Recovery
• Title Deed Conditions
• Membership Of Non Profit Company

Weitz Viljoen and Associates Incorporated v Rising Dragon Consulting (Pty) Ltd t/a Antonie Consulting (14817/2024)

Weitz Viljoen and Associates Incorporated v Rising Dragon Consulting (Pty) Ltd t/a Antonie Consulting (14817/2024) [2025] ZAWCHC 294 (14 July 2025)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14817/2024

Judge

Nuku

The court found that the plaintiff's delay in delivering the Rule 30 application was minimal and adequately explained, with no prejudice to the defendant and significant prejudice to the plaintiff if condonation was refused. The Rule 30 application was interlocutory and not subject to the strict requirements of Rule 6(5). The defendant's delivery of a special plea, plea-over, and claim in reconvention prior to the determination of its exception constituted an irregular step under Rule 30, as the rules require a choice between delivering a plea or an exception, not both. The exception raised b…

Source excerpt

• Rule 30 Irregular Step
• Condonation
• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Jurisdiction
• Locus Standi
• Authority Of Attorney

Mahanyelo N.O and Others v Venter (116098/23)

Mahanyelo N.O and Others v Venter (116098/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 496 (16 May 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

116098/23

Judge

N L Moila

The court found that the plaintiffs' particulars of claim contain all the necessary averments to sustain a cause of action against the defendant. The allegations provide sufficient detail regarding the liquidation, the defendant's role as director, and the alleged fraudulent conduct. The defendant's complaints relate to facta probantia (evidence) rather than facta probanda (material facts required to be pleaded). The court accepted the pleaded facts as true and held that, on any reasonable interpretation, the particulars of claim disclose a cause of action. The exception was therefore dismiss…

Source excerpt

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Companies Act Liability
• Liquidation Proceedings
• Fraudulent Trading
• Director Liability

Modise Modise Legal Practitioners t/a Modise Modise Attorneys v Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality (4208/2024)

Modise Modise Legal Practitioners t/a Modise Modise Attorneys v Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality (4208/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 105 (24 March 2025)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4208/2024

Judge

Ntanga AJ

The plaintiff's particulars of claim failed to plead acceptance of the defendant's offer of appointment in the mode stipulated in the letters of appointment, which was a suspensive condition for contract formation. The absence of such an averment means the pleadings do not disclose a cause of action for breach of contract. The requirement to confirm acceptance in writing was not merely administrative but a prescribed mode of acceptance necessary for a binding contract. The court accepted the defendant's exception and found that the plaintiff's pleadings were excipiable. The court did not make…

Source excerpt

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Contract Formation
• Mode Of Acceptance
• Legal Practitioners Admission
• Pleading Requirements

Vaal University of Technology v Peach (25805/2021)

Vaal University of Technology v Peach (25805/2021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 280 (14 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

25805/2021

Judge

E Dreyer

The High Court dismissed an exception to particulars of claim, holding that the pleadings disclosed a contractual money claim for specific performance.

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Specific Performance
• Contractual Obligations
• Pleading Requirements
• Exception-to-particulars-of-claim
• Specific-performance

Insingigiza Security CO v PRASA (11755/21)

Insingigiza Security CO v PRASA (11755/21) [2025] ZAGPJHC 270 (13 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

11755/21

Judge

Kooverjie

The High Court dismissed an exception to particulars of claim, holding that the pleaded breach over unpaid PSIRA increases disclosed a valid cause of action.

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Breach Of Contract
• Security Services Agreement
• Psira Increases
• Pleading Requirements
• Exception-to-particulars-of-claim

Maas N.O and Another v Bester N.O and Others (006981/24)

Maas N.O and Another v Bester N.O and Others (006981/24) [2025] ZAGPPHC 218 (10 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

006981/24

Judge

E van der Schyff

The High Court dismissed an exception to particulars of claim based on section 26 of the Insolvency Act, finding the pleadings could sustain a statutory claim.

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Insolvency Act Section 26
• Ponzi Scheme Liquidation
• Joinder Of Alternative Plaintiffs
• Exception-to-particulars-of-claim
• Insolvency-act-section-26

Gumede v Minister of Home Affairs (2024/026615)

Gumede v Minister of Home Affairs (2024/026615) [2025] ZAGPJHC 173 (23 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/026615

Judge

W.J. du Plessis

The court held that the particulars of claim disclose a cause of action in delict. Although the conduct complained of may constitute administrative action, the plaintiff is not seeking a review under PAJA but rather damages for negligent conduct. The principle of subsidiarity does not preclude a delictual claim in these circumstances. The plaintiff pleaded the essential elements of a delictual claim: wrongful act or omission, fault, causation, and damages. The pleadings are sufficiently particular to enable the defendant to respond, and evidence could be led to prove the claim. Therefore, the…

Source excerpt

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Negligence
• Vicarious Liability
• Bill Of Rights Infringement
• Subsidiarity Principle
• Identity Document Dispute

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr Inc and Another v Centura Real Estate (Pty) Ltd (056456/2023)

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr Inc and Another v Centura Real Estate (Pty) Ltd (056456/2023) [2025] ZAGPJHC 235 (10 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

056456/2023

Judge

Fisher

The High Court upheld an exception, finding the particulars of claim disclosed no cause of action against the conveyancing attorneys because the contract did not create the pleaded mandate.

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Mandate
• Conveyancing Attorney Liability
• Contract Interpretation
• Exception-to-particulars-of-claim
• Contract-interpretation

Olivier NO v Transnet SOC (1803/2023)

Olivier NO v Transnet SOC (1803/2023) [2025] ZANCHC 13 (17 January 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1803/2023

Judge

MC Mamosebo

The court dismissed Transnet’s exception to particulars of claim in a delict action over fire damage allegedly caused by a locomotive.

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Actio Legis Aquiliae
• Wrongfulness
• Causation
• Quantum Of Damages
• Exception-to-particulars-of-claim