South Africa Case Law

Masoanganye N.O v Nedbank Limited and Others (2024/089403)

Masoanganye N.O v Nedbank Limited and Others (2024/089403) [2025] ZAGPPHC 47 (27 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2024/089403

Judge

Dippenaar

The court found that, following the variation of the forfeiture order, both the capital amount and the accrued interest on the R35 million vested in the State. The forfeiture order did not create a debtor-creditor relationship between the curator (representing the State) and the DRC, and thus no debt existed that could be attached under rule 45(12). The DRC had no claim against the curator, and the assets were not subject to execution by the tenth respondent. The provisions of POCA make clear that forfeiture is to the State, not to any other party, and any rights not exercisable by the State…

Source excerpt

• Interim Interdict
• Writ Of Execution
• Forfeiture Order
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Curatorship
• Attachment Of Debt

W.A.S.B v J.M.K (046725/23)

W.A.S.B v J.M.K (046725/23) [2025] ZAGPPHC 44 (17 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

046725/23

Judge

Nyathi

Rule 43 interim maintenance and legal-costs application dismissed for non-disclosure and insufficient proof of need.

• Rule 43 Application
• Spousal Maintenance
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Non Disclosure
• Forfeiture Order
• Matrimonial Property Act

Ferreira v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (1159/2018)

Ferreira v Minister of Safety and Security and Another (1159/2018) [2024] ZANCHC 76 (16 August 2024)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1159/2018

Judge

Lever

The court held that the claim for damages relating to the transport and repair of the vehicle only became due when the plaintiff became aware of the damage upon the vehicle's return on 13 July 2016. As summons was served within three years of this date, this claim had not prescribed. Regarding loss of income, the court found that while there was a debt from the date of seizure until the forfeiture order, prescription ran for that period and the claim for loss of income from 12 October 2009 to 14 October 2010 had prescribed. However, once the forfeiture order was issued, the defendants were no…

Source excerpt

• Prescription Act
• Continuous Wrong
• Forfeiture Order
• Loss Of Income
• Damages To Property

Tegeta Exploration and Resources (Pty) Ltd v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (62604/2021; 62601/2021)

Tegeta Exploration and Resources (Pty) Ltd v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (62604/2021; 62601/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 2037 (11 December 2023)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

62604/2021; 62601/2021

Judge

Phooko

The court held that during business rescue proceedings, the business rescue practitioners have exclusive authority to manage the company and to institute or defend legal proceedings on its behalf. The board of directors retains certain governance functions but cannot act independently in litigation concerning company property without the express approval of the BRPs. Any attempt by the board or its members to represent the company in such proceedings, without BRP consent, is void. The applicant, Ms Ragavan, failed to obtain the necessary approval from the BRPs and thus lacked locus standi to…

Source excerpt

• Business Rescue
• Locus Standi
• Forfeiture Order
• Companies Act Section 140
• Rule 7 Notice

B.R v D.R (14189/2022)

B.R v D.R (14189/2022) [2023] ZAWCHC 59 (17 March 2023)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

14189/2022

Judge

Kusevitsky

Rule 43 application dismissed: the court refused interim maintenance and legal-costs contribution, finding the respondent had not shown inability to support himself.

• Interim Maintenance
• Rule 43 Procedure
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Forfeiture Order
• Domestic Violence Allegations
• Rule-43

T v T and Others (2021/45975)

T v T and Others (2021/45975) [2022] ZAGPJHC 785 (11 October 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/45975

Judge

Moorcroft

The High Court granted an eviction order after finding the applicant owned the property following a divorce forfeiture order and no enforceable agreement gave the respondent rights.

• Eviction
• Unlawful Occupation
• Forfeiture Order
• Alienation Of Land Act
• Prevention Of Illegal Eviction Act
• Unlawful-occupation

Mthombeni v Mthombeni (9339/2018)

Mthombeni v Mthombeni (9339/2018) [2020] ZAGPPHC 791 (10 December 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

9339/2018

Judge

N Janse Van Nieuwenhuizen

Leave to appeal was dismissed after the court found the applicant had a fair opportunity to participate and that the forfeiture order was supported by the evidence.

• Leave To Appeal
• Fair Trial Rights
• Forfeiture Order
• Balance Of Probabilities
• Leave-to-appeal
• Fair-trial

Land and Agriculture Bank of South Africa and Others v CPAD Farm Holdings and Others (2667/2017)

Land and Agriculture Bank of South Africa and Others v CPAD Farm Holdings and Others (2667/2017) [2020] ZAECPEHC 24 (15 July 2020)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

2667/2017

Judge

Goosen

The court refused to clarify a forfeiture-related order, finding no ambiguity, but granted the Minister leave to appeal on an additional ground.

• Clarification Of Court Order
• Forfeiture Order
• Leave To Appeal
• Powers Of Curator Bonis
• Section 57 Poca
• Clarification-of-court-order

Moyo v National Director of Public Prosecutions (38893/2017)

Moyo v National Director of Public Prosecutions (38893/2017) [2019] ZAGPPHC 639 (18 November 2019)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

38893/2017

Judge

E.M. Kubushi

The High Court granted leave to appeal against a forfeiture-order variation ruling, after the appellant argued the matter should have been considered under section 25(1) of the Constitution.

• Forfeiture Order
• Variation Of Court Order
• Arbitrary Deprivation Of Property
• Section 25 Constitution
• Inherent Jurisdiction
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act

Mtoko v National Director of Public Prosecutions (M505/2017)

Mtoko v National Director of Public Prosecutions (M505/2017) [2019] ZANWHC 46 (30 August 2019)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

M505/2017

Judge

M E Mametse

The High Court rescinded a POCA forfeiture order over a motor vehicle, finding the applicant showed a bona fide defence and a reasonable explanation for default.

• Forfeiture Order
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Default Judgment
• Bona Fide Defence
• Poica-forfeiture