Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
5 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2023] ZAFSHC 258

Tuhf Limited v Master of the High Court Bloemfontein and Others (337/2023)

Tuhf Limited v Master of the High Court Bloemfontein and Others (337/2023) [2023] ZAFSHC 258 (4 July 2023)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
337/2023
Judge
Van Rhyn

The court found that the Master's directive allowing a 10% fee for the sale of the property as a going concern was arbitrary and unsupported by adequate reasons. The property was not sold as a going concern, as it was not advertised or agreed to be sold as such, and the sale agreement did not include transfer of business assets or goodwill. The majority of tenants were non-paying or illegal occupants, and the property generated insufficient income to sustain a business. The correct tariff for liquidator remuneration was 3% for the sale of immovable property, subject to the Master's discretion…

Source excerpt

  • Liquidator Remuneration
  • Companies Act Section 407
  • Sale Of Immovable Property
  • Going Concern
  • Master Review
  • Tariff B Application
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2023] ZALAC 10

Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd and Others v CCI SA (Umhlanga) (Pty) Ltd and Others (JA 12/2023)

Mobile Telephone Networks (Pty) Ltd and Others v CCI SA (Umhlanga) (Pty) Ltd and Others (JA 12/2023) [2023] ZALAC 10; (2023) 44 ILJ 1906 (LAC); [2023] 10 BLLR 1006 (LAC) (15 June 2023)

Court
Labour Appeal Court
Case number
JA 12/2023
Judges
Waglay JP, Sutherland JA, Gqamana AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that section 197 of the Labour Relations Act was not triggered by the termination of the contract between MTN and CCI. Although a discrete MTN business unit existed within CCI, there was no transfer of that business unit as a going concern to MTN, Ibridge, or Ison. The termination resulted only in a redistribution of call volumes among existing service providers, with no transfer of assets, operational capacity, or workforce retaining its identity. The facts did not support the Labour Court's finding that section 197 applied, as the essential elements of a transfe…

Source excerpt

  • Section 197 Transfer
  • Outsourcing
  • Going Concern
  • Job Security
  • Contractual Termination
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2022] ZAFSHC 168

Johannes Jacobus Erasmus N.O and Others v Stefanus Johannes Nel Van Rensburg N.O and Others (3692/2020)

Johannes Jacobus Erasmus N.O and Others v Stefanus Johannes Nel Van Rensburg N.O and Others (3692/2020) [2022] ZAFSHC 168 (4 July 2022)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
3692/2020
Judge
De Kock

The court found that the applicants did not provide a reasonable explanation for their default or for condonation, nor did they raise a bona fide defence with reasonable prospects of success. The new grounds raised in the heads of argument were not purely points of law and could not be considered at this stage. The applicants had acknowledged the respondents as landlords and paid rent accordingly, and the property was sold as a going concern. The requirements for a transaction to qualify as a going concern were not disputed in the court a quo and were raised for the first time on appeal. The…

Source excerpt

  • Leave To Appeal
  • Condonation
  • Rescission Of Judgment
  • Locus Standi
  • Going Concern
  • Excipiability
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2015] ZALCJHB 204

SATAWU and Another v MEC: Gauteng for Roads & Transport and Others (J1142/15)

SATAWU and Another v MEC: Gauteng for Roads & Transport and Others (J1142/15) [2015] ZALCJHB 204; (2015) 36 ILJ 3155 (LC) (15 July 2015)

Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
J1142/15
Judge
B Whitcher

The court found that while certain components of Putco's business—such as the contractual right to perform services, a general customer base, the right of use of bus stops and terminals, one depot, and some former drivers—were transferred to Autopax, these were insufficient and too fragmented to constitute a transfer of a business as a going concern. The majority of key assets, including buses, depots, and most employees, remained with Putco. The court emphasised that section 197 requires the transfer of a discrete, autonomous, and identifiable business undertaking, which was not present in t…

Source excerpt

  • Section 197 Transfer
  • Outsourcing
  • Going Concern
  • Change Of Service Provider
  • Employment Protection
  • Government Subsidy
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2015] ZALAC 118

TAWUSA obo Others v TANSNAT (Pty )Ltd & 2 Others (JA95/13)

TAWUSA obo Others v TANSNAT (Pty )Ltd & 2 Others (JA95/13) [2015] ZALAC 118 (26 February 2015)

Court
Labour Appeal Court
Case number
JA95/13
Judges
Davis, Sutherland, Mngqibisa-Thusi

The court held that a month-to-month caretaker contract pending the appointment of a new operator does not constitute a transfer of a business as a going concern under section 197 of the Labour Relations Act. The arrangement lacked the necessary permanence and continuity, and did not involve the seamless transfer of the business, assets, employees, and customers. Furthermore, the appellants failed to establish which employees were affected and entitled to relief, as the evidence showed that the listed employees had been retrenched and were not employed by REMANT at the relevant time. The appe…

Source excerpt

  • Section 197 Transfer
  • Going Concern
  • Outsourcing Arrangements
  • Employee Retrenchment
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2014] ZALCJHB 61

Unitrans Supply Chain Solutions (Pty) and Another v Nampak Glass (Pty) Ltd and Others (J195/14)

Unitrans Supply Chain Solutions (Pty) and Another v Nampak Glass (Pty) Ltd and Others (J195/14) [2014] ZALCJHB 61; (2014) 35 ILJ 2888 (LC) (24 February 2014)

Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
J195/14
Judge
Van Niekerk

The court held that the termination of the warehousing agreement between Unitrans and Nampak and the appointment of TMS to provide similar services constituted a transfer of a business as a going concern under section 197 of the Labour Relations Act. The court found that the affected employees, although formally employed by the second applicant, were engaged solely to provide services under the warehousing agreement and worked under the control of the first applicant. The continuity of services, use of Nampak's infrastructure and assets, and the assumption of the right to use those assets by…

Source excerpt

  • Section 197 Transfer
  • Outsourcing
  • Going Concern
  • Employment Continuity
  • Group Structures
  • Service Provider Change
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2002] ZALC 83

South African Municipal Workers Union and Others v Rand Airport Management Company (Pty) Ltd and Others (JS958/02)

South African Municipal Workers Union and Others v Rand Airport Management Company (Pty) Ltd and Others (JS958/02) [2002] ZALC 83; (2002) 23 ILJ 2304 (LC); [2002] 12 BLLR 1220 (LC) (27 September 2002)

Court
Labour Court
Case number
JS958/02
Judge
A A Landman

The court found that the outsourcing of the gardening and security functions by Rand Airport did not constitute a transfer of a business or part thereof as a going concern under section 197 of the Labour Relations Act. The gardening function was not an entity with its own management, assets, customers, or goodwill, but merely an activity forming part of non-core maintenance services. The security function had not been transferred, as no outsourcing agreement had been concluded between Rand Airport and Capital Air, and the facts did not support the existence of a going concern. The court held…

Source excerpt

  • Section 197 Transfer
  • Outsourcing
  • Going Concern
  • Employee Rights
  • Retrenchment
  • Contract Of Employment
Read case analysis
Tax Law [2001] ZASCA 95

Milner Street Properties (Pty) Ltd v Eckstein Properties (Pty) Ltd (488/99)

Milner Street Properties (Pty) Ltd v Eckstein Properties (Pty) Ltd (488/99) [2001] ZASCA 95; 2001 (4) SA 1315 (SCA); 64 SATC 60 (21 September 2001)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
488/99
Judges
Nienaber, Schutz, Scott, Navsa, Nugent

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the formal written requirements introduced by the amendment to section 11(1)(e) of the Value Added Tax Act were probative, not constitutive. Their purpose was to provide certainty for the Commissioner regarding the nature of the transaction, not to invalidate agreements that failed to record the requirements in writing. The parties were in consensus that the sale was of an enterprise as a going concern and that the purchase price was inclusive of VAT at zero percent. The failure to record these facts in writing was due to ignorance of the amendment, not a…

Source excerpt

  • Value Added Tax Act
  • Zero Rating
  • Rectification Of Contract
  • Formal Requirements
  • Going Concern
  • Transfer Duty
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.