South Africa Case Law

Gamede v Sani Fleet Management (Pty) Ltd (2021/4135)

Gamede v Sani Fleet Management (Pty) Ltd (2021/4135) [2025] ZAGPJHC 240 (27 June 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/4135

Judge

E F Dippenaar

The court found that the default judgment was erroneously sought and granted against the applicant because the deed of suretyship relied upon was invalid and did not comply with section 6 of the General Law Amendment Act 50 of 1956. The particulars of claim misstated the position reflected in the deed of suretyship, and no rectification was pleaded or obtained. The registrar granted judgment without a legal foundation, constituting a procedural error under Rule 42(1)(a). The applicant was absent as envisaged by the rule, as there was no evidence he was notified that default judgment was being…

Source excerpt

• Rescission Of Judgment
• Suretyship
• Default Judgment
• Rule 42
• General Law Amendment Act
• Rectification

Firstrand Bank Limited v Ayob and Another (045157/2023)

Firstrand Bank Limited v Ayob and Another (045157/2023) [2025] ZAGPPHC 350 (15 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

045157/2023

Judge

Baqwa

The court found that the suretyships were executed in manuscript during a virtual meeting, as evidenced by video footage and corroborated by the applicant's representative. The respondents' claims of electronic execution and forgery were contradicted by their earlier admissions and the memorandum of agreement acknowledging their indebtedness. The video footage and email copies of the suretyships were admissible under section 15 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, and the respondents retained the originals. The respondents' defences were rejected as unsustainable and deceitf…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship
• Electronic Signature
• Admissibility Of Video Evidence
• Contract Enforcement
• General Law Amendment Act
• Electronic Communications And Transactions Act

Standard Bank of South Africa v Kyriacou and Others (16547/2022)

Standard Bank of South Africa v Kyriacou and Others (16547/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1190 (20 November 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

16547/2022

Judge

Ntlama-Makhanya

The High Court granted summary judgment on the reserved prayers, holding the suretyship valid and ordering the mortgaged property specially executable.

• Summary Judgment
• Suretyship
• Liquid Document
• Execution Of Immovable Property
• General Law Amendment Act
• Certificate Of Balance

Billion Property Developments v Nevzomark (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/104985)

Billion Property Developments v Nevzomark (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/104985) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1045 (13 October 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023/104985

Judge

Amien

The High Court dismissed exceptions in a lease and suretyship dispute, holding that the second defendant’s initials satisfied signature requirements and jurisdiction was adequately pleaded.

• Exception To Particulars Of Claim
• Suretyship Formalities
• Lease Agreement
• Jurisdiction
• General Law Amendment Act
• Exception-to-particulars-of-claim

Nedbank Ltd v Langpiets Vallei CC and Others (494/2023)

Nedbank Ltd v Langpiets Vallei CC and Others (494/2023) [2023] ZAMPMBHC 70 (12 December 2023)

Court

Mbombela High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

494/2023

Judge

Greyling-Coetzer AJ

The High Court upheld jurisdiction and granted summary judgment against two sureties for Nedbank, rejecting Rule 30A and compliance objections.

• Summary Judgment
• Suretyship
• General Law Amendment Act
• Jurisdiction
• Certificate Of Balance
• Attorney And Client Costs

Dolbey v Nedbank Limited (AR148/2022)

Dolbey v Nedbank Limited (AR148/2022) [2023] ZAKZPHC 150 (24 November 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR148/2022

Judges

Poyo Dlwati, Henriques, Z P Nkosi

The High Court dismissed an appeal over whether the appellant signed a suretyship in favour of Nedbank, upholding the trial court’s credibility findings.

• Suretyship Agreement
• Burden Of Proof
• Credibility Of Witnesses
• General Law Amendment Act
• Signature Dispute
• Suretyship

Motwell Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd v Van Rensburg and Another (56155/2021)

Motwell Plant Hire (Pty) Ltd v Van Rensburg and Another (56155/2021) [2023] ZAGPJHC 930 (21 August 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

56155/2021

Judge

EF Dippenaar

The court held that the suretyship clause, when read in the context of the entire agreement, sufficiently identified the company as the principal debtor. The reference to 'the hirer' in the suretyship clause was clarified by the 'Client Mandate' on page 1, which named the company and was initialled by the first respondent. The respondents' attempt to separate the 'Client Mandate' from the rest of the agreement was artificial and ignored the document's structure and context. Extrinsic evidence could be used to identify the principal debtor, but in this case, the written agreement itself was su…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship
• General Law Amendment Act
• Contractual Formalities
• Incorporation By Reference

Bradley Interiors CC and Another v Adprops SA (Pty) Ltd (AR139/2022)

Bradley Interiors CC and Another v Adprops SA (Pty) Ltd (AR139/2022) [2023] ZAKZPHC 67 (2 June 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

AR139/2022

Judges

Smart, Steyn

The High Court dismissed an appeal against summary judgment, holding that a lease signed by the second appellant also made him personally liable as surety.

• Suretyship
• Lease Agreement
• General Law Amendment Act
• Summary Judgment
• Personal Liability
• Lease-agreement

Spark v Hard Hat Equipment Hire (PROPRIETARY) Limited : In re: Hard Hat Equipment Hire (PROPRIETARY) Limited v K2014137790 (PROPRIETARY) Limited (1319/2019)

Spark v Hard Hat Equipment Hire (PROPRIETARY) Limited : In re: Hard Hat Equipment Hire (PROPRIETARY) Limited v K2014137790 (PROPRIETARY) Limited (1319/2019) [2022] ZAGPJHC 428 (21 June 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

1319/2019

Judge

V Harrison

The court found that the suretyship agreement failed to comply with the formal requirements of section 6 of the General Law Amendment Act 50 of 1956, as it did not properly identify the plaintiff as the creditor and instead bound the applicant as surety to the first defendant. This defect rendered the suretyship invalid and incapable of rectification. The court distinguished the present facts from Inventive Labour Structuring, where the principal debtor and surety were the same natural person, noting that here the parties were distinct legal entities but the document still failed to meet stat…

Source excerpt

• Suretyship
• Rectification
• Formal Requirements
• General Law Amendment Act
• Pleading Amendment

Goosebay Farm (Pty) Ltd v Icon Civil Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Another (2473/2020)

Goosebay Farm (Pty) Ltd v Icon Civil Engineering (Pty) Ltd and Another (2473/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 193 (4 February 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2473/2020

Judge

Mkhabela

The High Court dismissed an exception to a claim against a director, holding that whether the agreement was guarantee or suretyship must be decided at trial.

• Exception Procedure
• Contract Of Guarantee
• Suretyship
• General Law Amendment Act
• Pleading Requirements
• Exception-procedure