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
N.F v Santam Limited (11554/2017) [2024] ZAWCHC 12 (26 January 2024)
The High Court granted condonation for the late filing of a replication in a medical-malpractice insurance dispute, finding triable issues about coverage and insolvency.
Bader and Others v Centriq Insurance Company Limited (4572/2015) [2017] ZAGPJHC 12 (16 February 2017)
The High Court held that a judgment against the insured did not, by itself, bind the insurer under section 156 of the Insolvency Act.
Hollard Insurance Company Ltd v Unitrans Fuel and Chemical (Pty) Ltd and Another (A5052/2010) [2012] ZAGPJHC 87 (8 May 2012)
The High Court held that section 156 of the Insolvency Act did not extend the insurer’s liability beyond the insurance contract, and the appeal was upheld.
Venfin Investments (Pty) Ltd v KZN Resins (Pty) Ltd t/a KZN Resins (642/2010) [2011] ZASCA 128; [2011] 4 All SA 369 (SCA) (15 September 2011)
The Supreme Court of Appeal rejected claims based on an alleged oral compensation agreement, a cession, and section 156 of the Insolvency Act.
Unitrans Freight (Pty) Ltd v Santawi Ltd (13515/02) [2002] ZAGPHC 28 (13 September 2002)
The High Court upheld an exception to particulars of claim, holding that section 156 of the Insolvency Act did not create a cause of action on these facts.
Coetzee v Attorneys' Insurance Indemnity Fund (126/2001) [2002] ZASCA 94; [2002] 4 All SA 509 (SCA); [2002] 4 All SA 1 (SCA); 2003 (1) SA 1 (SCA) (2 September 2002)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the limitation of liability clause in the indemnity policy applies to both the capital claim and the claimant's costs and expenses. The wording of clause 3.1, which refers to 'all claims and claimants’ costs and expenses', was interpreted to include the costs of the third party (Coetzee) within the R1 million limit. The Court rejected the argument that clause 6.10 of the policy increased the indemnity limit by the amount of costs incurred prior to payment, finding that the clause merely ensures the insurer remains liable for costs already incurred when it…
Source excerpt
Mccarthy Contractors (Pty) Ltd. v Aegis Insurance Company Ltd. (374/92) [1993] ZASCA 199 (1 December 1993)
The court held that a professional indemnity policy did not cover rectification costs incurred after the policy period ended, so the appeal failed.
Supermarket Leaseback (Elsburg) (Pty) Ltd. v Santam Insurance (329/89) [1990] ZASCA 131; 1991 (1) SA 410 (AD); (13 November 1990)
The Appellate Division held that section 156 of the Insolvency Act did not let the landlord claim directly from the tenant’s insurer, because the policy covered property damage, not third-party liability.
Explore more
