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
Corvine Investments CC v Advtech (PTY) Ltd t/a Property Division (2145/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 617 (17 August 2022)
The court held that the subsidiary, not Advtech Limited, was the contracting party and dismissed the claims with costs; veil piercing was refused.
Oberholzer v Glocell (Pty) Ltd and Another (20338/2015) [2017] ZAGPPHC 415 (26 July 2017)
The High Court dismissed one exception to a claim for employment commission but upheld another, finding no legal nexus between the plaintiff and the first defendant.
Vienings v Paint and Ladders (Pty) Ltd (12929/2009) [2012] ZAKZDHC 61 (30 October 2012)
The court found that the right to seek security for costs under section 13 of the Companies Act 1973 accrued when summons was served and survived the repeal of the Act by virtue of section 12(2)(c) of the Interpretation Act. The defendant provided credible evidence that the plaintiff had failed to pay a previous costs order, which was ultimately settled by another company in the group, and the plaintiff refused to provide any financial disclosure or explanation. The plaintiff's reliance on its group structure and listed status was insufficient, as only the plaintiff company is liable for cost…
Source excerpt
Lesotho National Life Assurance Company Limited v Standard Bank Unit Trusts Limited (770/2002_) [2005] ZAFSHC 29; ; (24 February 2005)
The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove that Stanfin and/or Van Jaarsveldt were authorised, either actually or ostensibly, by the defendant to conclude the contract. There was no evidence that the defendant created any representation by words or conduct that Stanfin or Van Jaarsveldt had authority to bind it. The mere fact that Stanfin and the defendant were part of the same group and shared branding was insufficient to establish agency or estoppel. The plaintiff's reliance on the impression created by the Standard Bank group was unreasonable, as each company is a separate legal en…
Source excerpt
Explore more
