South Africa Case Law

Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture, A Joint Venture Established between Richtersveld Mining Company (Pty) Ltd and Alexkor Limited v Alexander Bay Diamond Company (Pty) Ltd (Previously Known as Scarlet Sky Investment 60 (Pty) Ltd (2129/2020)

Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture, A Joint Venture Established between Richtersveld Mining Company (Pty) Ltd and Alexkor Limited v Alexander Bay Diamond Company (Pty) Ltd (Previously Known as Scarlet Sky Investment 60 (Pty) Ltd (2129/2020) [2025] ZANCHC 42 (23 May 2025)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

2129/2020

Judge

MC Mamosebo

High Court decision granting leave to amend pleadings in a contract dispute, rejecting objections that the amendment application was procedurally defective or excipiable.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Excipiability
• Illegal Contract
• State Procurement
• Diamonds Act Compliance
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act

Mtshali v Harbour Town Homeowners Association (A2024-034881)

Mtshali v Harbour Town Homeowners Association (A2024-034881) [2025] ZAGPJHC 84 (21 January 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2024-034881

Judges

Liebenberg, Nty Siwendu

The High Court upheld summary judgment for an HOA over arrear levies, rejecting prescription, membership, excipiability, and counterclaim defences.

• Summary Judgment
• Homeowners Association Liability
• Prescription Act
• Membership Of Non Profit Company
• Counterclaim
• Memorandum Of Incorporation

BMW Financial Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Doola (2021-35668)

BMW Financial Services South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Doola (2021-35668) [2025] ZAGPPHC 74 (20 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2021-35668

Judge

Le Grange

The court found that the deponent's authority and locus standi were not in issue, as the proceedings were duly authorised by the attorneys acting for the plaintiff, and any challenge should have been brought under Rule 7. The court held that the proposed amendments did not introduce a new cause of action, but rather clarified and supplemented the original claim against the respondent as surety for the debt incurred by a third party. The amendments provided further factual support for the original right of action and did not alter the substance of the claim. The court was not persuaded that th…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Suretyship
• Cause Of Action Definition
• Excipiability
• Costs Orders

Lizinex (Pty) Limited v FPC Solutions (Pty) Limited and Others (2022/17136)

Lizinex (Pty) Limited v FPC Solutions (Pty) Limited and Others (2022/17136) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1261 (3 November 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/17136

Judge

Dosio

The court found that the proposed amendment does not constitute a withdrawal of an admission, as the admission of ownership remains extant and does not equate to locus standi. The amendment does not render the pleadings excipiable, as the issues raised are triable and can be determined at trial. The court held that any prejudice to the plaintiff arising from the pending summary judgment application does not justify refusal of the amendment, as summary judgment is not a final determination of the claim. The defendants' right to amend pleadings to ensure proper ventilation of disputes outweighs…

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Withdrawal Of Admission
• Locus Standi
• Excipiability
• Lease Dispute
• Summary Judgment

Ellis v Eden; Eden v Ellis and Another (10604/2020)

Ellis v Eden; Eden v Ellis and Another (10604/2020) [2022] ZAWCHC 143 (28 July 2022)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

10604/2020

Judge

Rogers

The court dismissed leave to appeal against a rescission ruling, holding that delay and lack of frank disclosure remained fatal despite arguments on excipiability and partnership liability.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Rule 42 1 A
• Partnership Disputes
• Excipiability
• Delay In Application
• Rescission-of-judgment

Johannes Jacobus Erasmus N.O and Others v Stefanus Johannes Nel Van Rensburg N.O and Others (3692/2020)

Johannes Jacobus Erasmus N.O and Others v Stefanus Johannes Nel Van Rensburg N.O and Others (3692/2020) [2022] ZAFSHC 168 (4 July 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3692/2020

Judge

De Kock

The court found that the applicants did not provide a reasonable explanation for their default or for condonation, nor did they raise a bona fide defence with reasonable prospects of success. The new grounds raised in the heads of argument were not purely points of law and could not be considered at this stage. The applicants had acknowledged the respondents as landlords and paid rent accordingly, and the property was sold as a going concern. The requirements for a transaction to qualify as a going concern were not disputed in the court a quo and were raised for the first time on appeal. The…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal
• Condonation
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Locus Standi
• Going Concern
• Excipiability

Vogler and Another v First For Women (Pty) Limited and Others (21019/2019)

Vogler and Another v First For Women (Pty) Limited and Others (21019/2019) [2021] ZAWCHC 101 (18 May 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

21019/2019

Judge

CN NZIWENI

The High Court refused leave to amend a summons because the pleaded contract and delict claims against the third defendant lacked material facts.

• Pleading Amendment
• Excipiability
• Breach Of Contract
• Pure Economic Loss
• Duty Of Care
• Vicarious Liability

Mamokhuthu Group Development CC v Cas Dry Attorneys and Others (919/2020)

Mamokhuthu Group Development CC v Cas Dry Attorneys and Others (919/2020) [2021] ZAMPMHC 40 (5 March 2021)

Court

Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

919/2020

Judge

Greyling-Coetzer

The High Court granted leave to amend particulars of claim, holding the citation change was not a substitution of parties and did not make the pleading excipiable.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Excipiability
• Misnomer
• Joint And Several Liability
• Amendment-of-pleadings
• Joint-and-several-liability

Booysen and Others v Ralais Investments CC (6470/18)

Booysen and Others v Ralais Investments CC (6470/18) [2019] ZAGPJHC 144 (14 May 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

6470/18

Judge

L Modiba

The court found that the proposed amendment failed to disclose a cause of action based on partnership, as the particulars of claim did not specify the date, terms, or duration of the partnership agreement. Furthermore, the contract-based claim did not sustain the relief sought in the amended prayers. Granting the amendment would render the particulars of claim excipiable for failing to disclose a cause of action or for vagueness and embarrassment. The court exercised its discretion to refuse the amendment, upholding the defendant's objections and dismissing the application to amend.

Source excerpt

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Partnership Dispute
• Excipiability
• Cause Of Action
• Vagueness And Embarrassment

Make Commodities (Pty) Ltd v Afrisam (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (3071/2018)

Make Commodities (Pty) Ltd v Afrisam (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (3071/2018) [2019] ZAGPJHC 62 (5 March 2019)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

3071/2018

Judge

R Sutherland

The court disallowed a plaintiff’s notice of amendment because the proposed alternative case depended on an excipiable contract-modification averment.

• Amendment Of Pleadings
• Excipiability
• Contract Modification
• Non Variation Clauses
• Amendment-of-pleadings
• Contract-modification