Arbee N.O and Others v Bryte Insurance Company Ltd (D13804/2023) [2025] ZAKZDHC 22 (16 April 2025)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
D13804/2023
Judge
Kuzwayo AJ
The court dismissed an application to compel further particulars in an insurance dispute, holding that Uniform rule 21(4), not rule 30A, governed the request.
Basdeo and Another v Discovery Life Limited (056880/23) [2024] ZAGPPHC 884 (10 September 2024)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
056880/23
Judge
Kooverjie
The High Court granted summary judgment for interest and attorney-and-client costs, finding the insurer’s deferment pending police investigation was not a bona fide defence.
S v Ndlovu (SS72/2019) [2021] ZAGPJHC 899 (22 October 2021)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
SS72/2019
Judge
Monama
The High Court convicted Rosemary Nomia Ndlovu on murder, fraud, defeating the ends of justice, incitement and attempted murder counts arising from insurance-linked killings.
Triton Pharmacare Corporate Ltd v Green and Another (2019/20464) [2020] ZAGPJHC 60 (28 February 2020)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2019/20464
Judge
M P Tsoka
The court found that the arbitrator, Mr Green, did not disregard the amount of R3 647 304.31 as alleged by Triton. The amount was considered in the award and factored into the calculation of Triton's indemnity. Even if the arbitrator had erred, such an error would not constitute exceeding his powers under section 33(1)(b) of the Arbitration Act. The application was found to be unfounded and vexatious, particularly as it unjustifiably impugned the integrity of the arbitrator. The court dismissed the application and awarded punitive costs against Triton.
Chard v Old Mutual Insure Limited (A66/2017) [2019] ZAKZDHC 23; [2020] 1 All SA 381 (KZD) (30 September 2019)
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Case number
A66/2017
Judge
Lopes
The court found that Old Mutual had not satisfied the requirements for invoking litigation privilege over the expert reports and correspondence. The evidence did not establish that the reports were obtained for the definite purpose of obtaining legal advice in circumstances where litigation was likely or reasonably anticipated. The initial involvement of Old Mutual was cooperative, and litigation was not contemplated until much later. The respondent failed to demonstrate the necessary intention or linkage to legal advice at the relevant time. Accordingly, the applicant was entitled to the dis…
Xego and Another v The State (CA&R30/2016) [2018] ZAECGHC 101 (11 October 2018)
Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
CA&R30/2016
Judge
N G Beshe
Criminal appeal in a fraud and insurance-claims case. Convictions were upheld, but the sentence on the main fraud count was reduced from 15 to 8 years.
Owners And Parties who bear risk in and to the Pontoon 'Margaret' and the Cargo of two Floating Docks and Twelve Barges v MT 'Salvaliant' (Application to Compel) (AC81/2009, AC144/2010) [2015] ZAWCHC 172 (16 November 2015)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
AC81/2009, AC144/2010
Judge
Bozalek
Admiralty application to compel further particulars. The court ordered limited particulars on agreements with the municipality, but refused most other requests.
Glencarol (Pty) Limited and Others v Emerald Risk Transfer Limited and Others (2014/40878) [2015] ZAGPJHC 246 (27 October 2015)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2014/40878
Judge
Opperman
The High Court dismissed an exception to amended particulars of claim, holding that an alleged repudiation pleading was irrelevant and caused no prejudice.
Klencovljevic v Discovery Life Limited (46154/2013 , 46155/2013) [2014] ZAGPJHC 191 (18 August 2014)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
46154/2013 , 46155/2013
Judge
FJ Becker
The court found that the respondent insurer failed to assess the applicant's claims within a reasonable time and did not establish any legal basis for indefinite deferral pending third party investigations. The respondent did not conduct its own investigation or make any election to repudiate or honour the policies during the six month period following claim submission. The court held that the insurer's right to a reasonable time to assess claims does not entitle it to postpone assessment indefinitely in the hope that external investigations might yield relevant information. Furthermore, the…