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
Southern Liqueur Company Limited v Noble Spirits (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (7243/2021) [2025] ZAWCHC 285 (11 July 2025)
Leave to appeal was refused in a trade mark interdict dispute about AFRULA and AMARULA, with costs awarded against the respondent.
ZA Online Store (Pty) Ltd ta ISTORE v Derek and Others (2025/081458) [2025] ZAGPJHC 734 (9 June 2025)
The court found that the applicant had no contractual relationship with the first respondent and had paid its contractor in full. The respondents' campaign, including false statements and threats of protest at business premises and the CEO's residence, was calculated to apply reputational pressure and coerce the applicant into intervening in a third-party dispute. The ongoing publication of false claims on platforms lacking journalistic accountability perpetuated reputational harm. The court held that the applicant's right to reputation was infringed, that injury was ongoing and reasonably ap…
Source excerpt
Cape South African Jewish Board of Deputies v Torr (EC11/2025) [2025] ZAEQC 4 (9 May 2025)
The respondent's videos, viewed contextually, propagated extreme, vile, and false accusations against Jewish people, including ritual murder, cannibalism, pedophilia, sexual violence, and inherent brutality. These statements were not bona fide artistic, academic, or scientific inquiry, nor fair and accurate reporting. The content was intended to incite harm and propagate hatred against Jewish people, falling squarely within the definition of hate speech under section 10(1) of PEPUDA. Freedom of expression under section 16 of the Constitution does not protect such speech. The respondent's cond…
Source excerpt
Watson v Adams and Others (2025/052925) [2025] ZAGPJHC 436 (8 May 2025)
The court found that the interim protection order was obtained by the first respondent through material non-disclosure and constituted an abuse of process. The respondent failed to disclose her own criminal conduct, the applicant's role as a state witness, and the fact that her identity was publicised by a third party, not the applicant. The applicant was denied a hearing both on anticipation and on the return date, resulting in a significant infringement of her constitutional rights. The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to set aside orders obtained through abuse of process, especially wh…
Source excerpt
Liberty Group Limited v Chonco and Another (7449/24P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 42 (25 April 2025)
The High Court interdicted former Liberty affiliates from posting defamatory claims online, finding the allegations unproven and not fair comment.
Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited v Artsolar (Pty) Ltd and Others (D1162/25) [2025] ZAKZDHC 16 (11 April 2025)
The court found that the IDC has a direct and substantial interest in the proceedings due to its statutory mandate and contractual relationship with Artsolar. The IDC's right to receive information, protected under section 16(1)(b) of the Constitution, and its statutory objectives under the Industrial Development Corporation Act, justify its joinder as a respondent. The interim order was overly broad, unjustifiably prohibiting disclosures to IDC that may be defensible under qualified privilege or statutory rights. The court held that reconsideration of the order was warranted to uphold IDC's…
Source excerpt
E.TV (Pty) Limited and Others v Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies and Others (2025/008928) [2025] ZAGPPHC 321 (27 March 2025)
The Court found that the decision to set the analogue switch-off date for 31 March 2025 was taken by Cabinet, not the Minister, contrary to statutory and constitutional requirements. The Minister failed to consult stakeholders regarding the actual proposed date, as required by law and the Constitutional Court's precedent. The evidence showed that hundreds of thousands of households would be left without access to television, violating their rights to freedom of expression and equality. The Minister's justification for the limitation of rights was found to be irrational and retrogressive. The…
Source excerpt
Zuma and Another v South African Broaddcasting Corporation and Others (2024/077748) [2025] ZAGPJHC 79 (31 January 2025)
The High Court dismissed a challenge to the SABC’s use of “Government of National Unity,” holding that the dispute was political, not constitutional.
Capital Newspapers (Pty) Ltd and Another v Media 24 Holding Ltd and Others (259/CAC/Oct24) [2024] ZACAC 5 (24 December 2024)
The Court found that the notified transaction reviewed by the Competition Commission was limited to the sale of On the Dot and certain community newspapers, and did not encompass the migration of other print titles to digital platforms. The migration decision was a separate commercial decision by Media 24, prompted by market dynamics and declining print circulation, and did not involve a change of control as required by the Competition Act for a merger. The applicants failed to establish a sufficiently close link between the migration and the notified merger to justify treating them as a comp…
Source excerpt
Els and Another v eMedia Investments (Pty) Ltd (25902/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1164 (19 November 2024)
The High Court dismissed an urgent interdict against 방송 of footage of a businessman was acquired by ruse, finding no clear right and that damages were an adequate remedy.
Explore more
