Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Centriq Insurance Company Limited v Oosthuizen and Another (237/2018) [2019] ZASCA 11; 2019 (3) SA 387 (SCA) (14 March 2019)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that Centriq’s exclusion clause did not bar cover for negligent financial advice causing an unsafe investment loss.
CMH Car Hire (Pty) Limited t/a First Car Rental v Banda (34321/2012) [2015] ZAGPJHC 240 (21 October 2015)
The court found that the term 'object' in clause 5.3.5 of the rental agreement was not defined and, applying principles of contract and insurance interpretation, should be given its ordinary meaning. Dictionaries define 'object' as a material thing that can be seen or touched, which includes a hillside or cliff. The plaintiff failed to prove negligence on the part of the defendant, and the defendant's evidence was credible and unchallenged. Therefore, the collision with the hillside constituted physical contact with an object, and the defendant was indemnified under the waiver. The plaintiff'…
Source excerpt
Mechanised Equipment Sales (Pty) Limited v Lion of Africa Insurance Company Limited (32874/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 757 (14 August 2015)
The High Court held that a bespoke insurance cover for mobile cranes prevailed over a conflicting exclusion clause, and ordered indemnity, interest and costs.
Holm v Sonland Ontwikkeling (Mpumalanga) (Edms) Bpk (58525/2008) [2010] ZAGPPHC 58; 2010 (6) SA 342 (GNP) (9 July 2010)
High Court delict case on premises liability, warning signs and an exclusion clause. The court found the owner 50% liable for injuries from diving into a dam.
GNJ Agricultural Financial Advisors CC v Hollard Insurance Company Ltd (9982/2006) [2008] ZAGPHC 250 (11 August 2008)
The High Court held that an insurance exclusion for “mechanical breakdown” was ambiguous and had to be read in favour of the insured, granting judgment to the plaintiff.
Allianz Insurance Ltd v RHI Refractories Africa (Pty) Ltd (616/06) [2007] ZASCA 174; [2007] SCA 174 (RSA); 2008 (3) SA 425 (SCA) (3 December 2007)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that an insurance exclusion for ‘unintended damage’ did not bar the insured’s repair claim for delamination of epoxy lining.
Hall v Hollard Insurance Company Ltd [2007] ZAGPHC 385; 00/06/01 (10 September 2007)
The High Court held that the insurer failed to prove an exclusion clause barred cover for a stolen Mercedes-Benz, and awarded the insured damages.
Commercial Union Assurance Company of South Africa Ltd. v Kwazulu Finance and Investment Corporation and Another (414/93) [1995] ZASCA 63; 1995 (3) SA 751 (AD); [1995] 2 All SA 628 (A) (30 May 1995)
The court interpreted a fire policy’s malicious damage extension and held that deliberate destruction to strip building materials was covered, despite the theft exclusion.
Lourens NO v Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society Ltd. (1/86) [1986] ZASCA 1 (25 February 1986)
The court interpreted an accident-policy exclusion for violating criminal law and dismissed the appeal, holding the insured’s traffic offences fell within the clause.
Explore more
