South Africa Case Law

Yan v Mahlangu and Others (2020/19368)

Yan v Mahlangu and Others (2020/19368) [2022] ZAGPJHC 833 (24 October 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2020/19368

Judge

RJ Moultrie

The court held that the settlement agreement did not oblige the applicant to act reasonably or to grant an extension of the payment date. The language of the agreement, particularly the use of 'may agree', indicated discretion rather than obligation. The respondent failed to plead or establish any implied or tacit term requiring the applicant to act reasonably or not to unreasonably withhold consent. Constitutional values and good faith do not override clear contractual terms or create new obligations absent proper pleading and legal development. The respondent's reasons for delay were not sh…

Source excerpt

• Contractual Interpretation
• Implied Terms
• Tacit Terms
• Good Faith In Contract
• Settlement Agreement Enforcement

Capitec Bank Holdings Limited and Another v Coral Lagoon Investments 194 (Pty) Ltd and Others (470/2020)

Capitec Bank Holdings Limited and Another v Coral Lagoon Investments 194 (Pty) Ltd and Others (470/2020) [2021] ZASCA 99; [2021] 3 All SA 647 (SCA); 2022 (1) SA 100 (SCA) (9 July 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

470/2020

Judges

Ponnan, Makgoka, Mbatha, Goosen, Unterhalter

The SCA held that Capitec’s consent was not required for Coral’s share sale, and that good faith could not rewrite the contract to impose it.

• Contract Interpretation
• Good Faith In Contract
• Shareholder Rights
• Black Economic Empowerment
• Parol Evidence Rule
• Contract-interpretation

Zipro Mineral Processing (Pty) Ltd v Coal Giant (Pty) Limited (436/2017)

Zipro Mineral Processing (Pty) Ltd v Coal Giant (Pty) Limited (436/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 818 (20 December 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

436/2017

Judge

Legodi

The court dismissed an urgent interdict application after finding that alleged undisclosed payments to a director undermined the applicant’s prima facie case.

• Interlocutory Interdict
• Breach Of Fiduciary Duty
• Contract Cancellation
• Good Faith In Contract
• Case Management
• Interlocutory-interdict

Wonderpark Handelaars CC v Kanonkop Stainless (Pty) Limited and Another (70923/2015)

Wonderpark Handelaars CC v Kanonkop Stainless (Pty) Limited and Another (70923/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 1044 (15 December 2016)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

70923/2015

Judge

N Kollapen

The High Court held that a lease renewal option was not validly exercised because no written notice was given, and rejected the claim that reliance on the clause was unconstitutional.

• Lease Termination
• Renewal Option
• Public Policy In Contract
• Constitutional Values In Contract
• Eviction
• Good Faith In Contract

Quebos Investments (Pty) Ltd v Camelot Holdings CC and Another (67081/2014)

Quebos Investments (Pty) Ltd v Camelot Holdings CC and Another (67081/2014) [2015] ZAGPPHC 1022 (3 November 2015)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

67081/2014

Judge

Louw AJ

The court found that the Petroleum Products Act and its regulations do not alter the common law position regarding lease renewal or confer possessory rights on retail licence holders. There was no contractual obligation on the applicant to negotiate or renew the lease with the respondents. The facts of this case differ materially from those in Everfresh, as there was no term requiring negotiation. The common law principle that a court cannot make a contract for the parties remains applicable. The court concluded that there are no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different…

Source excerpt

• Petroleum Products Act
• Lease Termination
• Retail Licence Nature
• Common Law Development
• Good Faith In Contract
• Rei Vindicatio

Department of Health v Jones and Another (C340/07)

Department of Health v Jones and Another (C340/07) [2014] ZALCCT 46 (18 June 2014)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C340/07

Judge

Molahlehi

Labour Court held it lacked jurisdiction to set aside a settlement agreement made an arbitration award, and dismissed the employer’s application with costs.

• Arbitration Award
• Good Faith In Contract
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Settlement Agreement
• Arbitration-award
• Settlement-agreement

ABSA Bank Ltd v Swart and Others (3753/2011)

ABSA Bank Ltd v Swart and Others (3753/2011) [2013] ZAECPEHC 4 (31 January 2013)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

3753/2011

Judge

J M Roberson

The High Court granted summary judgment on suretyships, rejecting rectification and prejudicial-conduct defences for lack of sufficient facts.

• Suretyship Liability
• Rectification
• Prejudicial Conduct
• Summary Judgment
• Good Faith In Contract
• Summary-judgment

Lob v Carribean Estates (Pty) Ltd (2007/16441)

Lob v Carribean Estates (Pty) Ltd (2007/16441) [2010] ZAGPJHC 72 (8 September 2010)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2007/16441

Judge

B H Mbha

The court refused leave to amend a plea and counterclaim, holding that alleged lack of good faith did not invalidate the exercise of an option right.

• Pleading Amendment
• Option Contracts
• Good Faith In Contract
• Vague And Embarrassing Pleading
• Declaratory Relief
• Pleading-amendment

Department of Health v Jones and Another (C 340/07)

Department of Health v Jones and Another (C 340/07) [2008] ZALC 237 (18 June 2008)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

C340/07

Judge

Molahlehi

The Labour Court dismissed an application to set aside a settlement agreement made an arbitration award, holding that rescission or review under the Act was required.

• Arbitration Award
• Good Faith In Contract
• Settlement Agreement
• Unfair Labour Practice
• Rescission And Review
• Contractual Obligations

Nedcor Bank Ltd. v SDR Investment Holdings Co (Pty) Ltd. (274/07)

Nedcor Bank Ltd. v SDR Investment Holdings Co (Pty) Ltd. (274/07) [2008] ZASCA 11; [2008] 3 All SA 409 (SCA) ; [2008] 2 All SA 627 (SCA); 2008 (3) SA 544 (SCA) (20 March 2008)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

274/07

Judges

Scott, Navsa, Mthiyane, Cloete, Snyders

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that implied or tacit terms cannot contradict express contract terms, and upheld the appeal.

• Implied Terms
• Tacit Terms
• Damages For Breach Of Contract
• Auction Sale Of Property
• Good Faith In Contract
• Contractual Discretion