South Africa Case Law

Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Another v Unemployment Insurance Fund and Others (2020/26468)

Vantage Mezzanine Fund II Partnership and Another v Unemployment Insurance Fund and Others (2020/26468) [2025] ZAGPPHC 345 (26 March 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2020/26468

Judge

BAM

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against an order striking out the defence for discovery non-compliance, finding no reasonable prospects of success.

• Leave To Appeal
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Rule 35 Discovery
• Costs Award
• Section 34 Rights
• Section 217 Constitution

Noortman v Road Accident Fund (A40/2023)

Noortman v Road Accident Fund (A40/2023) [2024] ZAMPMBHC 76 (28 October 2024)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

A40/2023

Judges

Mazibuko, Langa, Vukeya

The High Court upheld an appeal against refusal to correct RAF identity details, finding the court a quo went beyond the papers and made unsupported fraud findings.

• Rectification Of Identity Details
• Road Accident Fund Claims
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Procedural Fairness
• Road-accident-fund-claims
• Rectification

Buechel v South African Securitisation Programme (RF) Limited and Others (3450/2022)

Buechel v South African Securitisation Programme (RF) Limited and Others (3450/2022) [2024] ZAWCHC 68 (5 March 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

3450/2022

Judge

M J Bishop

The High Court granted leave to appeal against refusal of rescission, holding the nature of the rescission discretion was unclear and could warrant appellate review.

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Leave To Appeal
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Rescission-of-judgment
• Leave-to-appeal
• Judicial-discretion

KA v KN (A2023/055189)

KA v KN (A2023/055189) [2024] ZAGPJHC 147 (21 February 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2023/055189

Judges

EF Dippenaar, Goodman

Appeal against a Children’s Court contact order was dismissed after the court found no basis to interfere and held the matter moot because later High Court proceedings overtook it.

• Contact Orders
• Best Interests Of Child
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Condonation
• Introduction Of Further Evidence
• Contact-orders

Vosloo N.O and Another v South African Medical Association NPC and Another (Leave to Appeal) (44983/2020)

Vosloo N.O and Another v South African Medical Association NPC and Another (Leave to Appeal) (44983/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 315 (13 May 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

44983/2020

Judge

N Davis

The High Court granted leave to appeal against its refusal to wind up SAMA, finding competing interpretations of a prior Labour Court judgment created a compelling reason to appeal.

• Trade Union Status
• Winding Up Applications
• Section 13 Labour Relations Act
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Leave-to-appeal
• Winding-up-applications

Maponya Motor City Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others v Hamilton N.O. and Others (20/39151)

Maponya Motor City Properties (Pty) Ltd and Others v Hamilton N.O. and Others (20/39151) [2022] ZAGPJHC 186 (29 March 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

20/39151

Judge

I Opperman

The court found that the applicants failed to meet the heightened threshold for leave to appeal as set out in section 17(1)(a) of the Superior Courts Act. The existence of the term requiring the Trusts to pledge their shares was not undisputed on the papers, and the main judgment had addressed the issue extensively. The applicants did not demonstrate any misdirection or irregularity in the exercise of the court's discretion regarding declaratory relief. There was no compelling reason or reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion. Accordingly, leave to appeal was…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Reasonable Prospect Of Success
• Declaratory Relief
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion

Stellenbosch University Law Clinic and Others v Lifestyle Direct Group International (Pty) Ltd and Others (16262/2019)

Stellenbosch University Law Clinic and Others v Lifestyle Direct Group International (Pty) Ltd and Others (16262/2019) [2021] ZAWCHC 220 (3 November 2021)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

16262/2019

Judge

P.A.L. Gamble

The court held that, even assuming the certification order is appealable, the respondents failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The arguments regarding lack of commonality and the need for individualized causation assessments were rejected, as the applicants' claims were based on the objective nature of the alleged fraudulent scheme. The court found that the certification of the class action was a proper exercise of judicial discretion, with no misdirection or failure to act judicially. The interests of justice supported certification, and the advantages of a class…

Source excerpt

• Class Action Certification
• Commonality Requirement
• Consumer Protection Act
• Fraudulent Misrepresentation
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion

Fidelity Security Services (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town and Others (A250/2018)

Fidelity Security Services (Pty) Ltd v City of Cape Town and Others (A250/2018) [2019] ZAWCHC 2 (6 February 2019)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A250/2018

Judges

Binns-Ward, Salie-Hlophe, Parker

The Full Court found that the court a quo materially misdirected itself by failing to apply the Biowatch principle, which requires the State to bear the costs in constitutional litigation where the challenge is successful. The litigation was essentially in defence of the applicants’ constitutional rights to lawful administrative action. The City, having conceded the merits of the review, should have been held liable for the applicants’ costs up to the point of its concession. The appellant’s liability should have been limited to costs occasioned by its answering and further affidavits and joi…

Source excerpt

• Judicial Review
• Costs In Constitutional Litigation
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Biowatch Principle

Kaniah v WPC Logistics (Joburg) CC and Others (5794/2016)

Kaniah v WPC Logistics (Joburg) CC and Others (5794/2016) [2018] ZAKZDHC 13 (9 May 2018)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

5794/2016

Judge

Henriques

The High Court dismissed leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of a different outcome, and corrected an ambiguous costs order under Rule 42.

• Leave To Appeal
• Liquidation Proceedings
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion
• Costs Orders
• Companies Act
• Close Corporations Act

Matthews N.O and Others v Thyne N.O and Others (20714/17)

Matthews N.O and Others v Thyne N.O and Others (20714/17) [2018] ZAGPPHC 30 (16 February 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

20714/17

Judge

N.M MAVUNDLA

The court found that although the third to sixth plaintiffs are peregrines residing in Australia, the second plaintiff possesses substantial assets and business interests in South Africa, including unencumbered immovable property and significant shareholding in local companies. The plaintiffs are jointly and severally liable for any adverse costs order, and the second plaintiff's assets provide sufficient assurance that costs can be recovered locally. The action brought by the plaintiffs was bona fide, aimed at recovering trust assets allegedly misappropriated by the sixth defendant, and not…

Source excerpt

• Security For Costs
• Peregrinus Vs Incola
• Trust Dispute
• Joint And Several Liability
• Constitutional Right Of Access
• Exercise Of Judicial Discretion