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
Akoodie and Another v Organi Mark (Pty) Ltd (11435/20) [2021] ZAGPPHC 648 (4 October 2021)
The court allowed the defendants to amend their plea to raise a jurisdictional special plea based on the Eswatini Companies Act.
Redis Construction Afrika (Pty) Ltd v Commission For Conciliation, Mediation And Arbitration and Others (D1118/12) [2014] ZALCD 15 (6 May 2014)
The court held that the CCMA has jurisdiction to determine the unfair dismissal dispute because the employment contract was entered into in South Africa, both parties are based in South Africa, and the dismissal occurred in South Africa. The applicant is an administration company registered in South Africa and does not have its own operations in the DRC, but administers construction companies there. The constitutional right to fair labour practices and the principle that every right must have a remedy support a purposive interpretation of jurisdiction. The court distinguished the cases of Ast…
Source excerpt
Casino Enterprises (Pty) Ltd v Gauteng Gambling Board and Others (SCA) [2011] ZASCA 155; 2011 (6) SA 614 (SCA); [2011] 4 All SA 573 (SCA) (28 September 2011)
The SCA held that internet gambling is regulated where the player is located: South Africans gambling online with a Swaziland casino contravened South African gambling laws.
Astral Operations Ltd v Parry (CA 8/05) [2008] ZALAC 29; (2008) 29 ILJ 2668 (LAC) (4 September 2008)
The Labour Appeal Court held that the Labour Court did not have jurisdiction over the respondent's claims because the employment was performed in Malawi, outside the territorial application of the Labour Relations Act and the Basic Conditions of Employment Act. The Court applied the principle that South African statutes do not have extra-territorial effect unless expressly stated. The locality of the undertaking, not the place of contract or residence of the parties, determines jurisdiction. Although the contract was concluded in South Africa and the parties were South African, the actual wor…
Source excerpt
Explore more
