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
6 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] ZAGPJHC 788

Sono and Another v Master of the High Court, Johannesburg and Others (2021/46542)

Sono and Another v Master of the High Court, Johannesburg and Others (2021/46542) [2023] ZAGPJHC 788 (3 July 2023)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2021/46542
Judge
Maier-Frawley

The application was dismissed because the requirements of section 2(3) of the Wills Act were not met. The contested will was neither personally drafted nor executed by the deceased, and the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bekker v Naude en Andere has authoritatively interpreted 'drafted' to mean personal creation by the deceased. The High Court is bound by this precedent and cannot adopt a broader interpretation. Although there was evidence of the deceased's intention to disinherit the third respondent, the absence of personal drafting or execution is fatal to the application. The court found no b…

Source excerpt

  • Wills Act Section 2 3
  • Intestate Succession
  • Formalities Of Wills
  • Judicial Precedent
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2023] ZAGPJHC 87

Moodliyar & Bedhesi Attorneys v Madatt and Another (11188/15)

Moodliyar & Bedhesi Attorneys v Madatt and Another (11188/15) [2023] ZAGPJHC 87 (6 February 2023)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
11188/15
Judge
M Olivier

The court found that the amendment to the particulars of claim introduced a new debtor, namely the minor child, and that the claim against the defendants in their representative capacity had prescribed. The original particulars of claim did not refer to the defendants in their representative capacity, and the amendment was effected more than three years after service of the original summons. The court distinguished Blaauwberg, holding that it dealt with a wrongly named debtor, whereas in this case a new debtor was introduced. The court was not persuaded by the plaintiff's arguments regarding…

Source excerpt

  • Prescription Act
  • Amendment Of Particulars Of Claim
  • Judicial Precedent
  • Leave To Appeal
  • Special Plea
  • Costs Order
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2019] ZAKZPHC 56

Ndlovu v S (AR96/2018)

Ndlovu v S (AR96/2018) [2019] ZAKZPHC 56; 2019 (2) SACR 484 (KZP) (12 August 2019)

Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Case number
AR96/2018
Judges
Ploos van Amstel, Bezuidenhout, Hadebe

The appeal against conviction was dismissed as the evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of rape in furtherance of a common purpose. However, following the Supreme Court of Appeal's decision in Mahlase v S, the prescribed minimum sentence of life imprisonment under s 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997, read with Part I of Schedule 2, was not applicable because only the appellant was convicted and the identities of his co-perpetrators were unknown and unconvicted. The offence thus fell under Part III of Schedule 2, with a prescribed minimum…

Source excerpt

  • Rape
  • Minimum Sentencing
  • Common Purpose
  • Criminal Law Amendment Act
  • Judicial Precedent
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2016] ZAGPPHC 485

Mphahlele and Others v Pan Africanist Congress of Azania of Another (8340/2016)

Mphahlele and Others v Pan Africanist Congress of Azania of Another (8340/2016) [2016] ZAGPPHC 485 (21 June 2016)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
8340/2016
Judge
T M Makgoka

The court found that the order made on 20 April 2016 was final in respect of the participation of the parties in the upcoming local government elections and thus appealable. However, the grounds for leave to appeal were unmeritorious. Mr Mphahlele's expulsion from the PAC was upheld by the Full Court, and he had not taken steps to challenge that decision. The principle that invalid administrative action cannot simply be ignored was applied by analogy, confirming the finality of the expulsion. The Electoral Commission's decision to suspend funding was provisional and did not require a court or…

Source excerpt

  • Leave To Appeal
  • Appealability Of Interim Orders
  • Judicial Precedent
  • Expulsion From Political Party
  • Electoral Commission Decisions
Read case analysis
Banking And Finance [2015] ZASCA 11

Firstrand Bank Limited v Kona and Another (20003/2014)

Firstrand Bank Limited v Kona and Another (20003/2014) [2015] ZASCA 11; 2015 (5) SA 237 (SCA) (13 March 2015)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
20003/2014
Judges
Mpati, Cachalia, Mbha, Van der Merwe, Meyer

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that an application by a credit provider for the sequestration of a consumer’s estate, relying on a claim under a credit agreement, does not constitute litigation or judicial process to enforce any right or security under the credit agreement as contemplated by section 88(3) of the National Credit Act. Therefore, the existence of a debt re-arrangement order is not a bar to the grant of a sequestration order. The court found that the respondents were in default under both the credit agreement and the debt re-arrangement order, and that there was no evidence the…

Source excerpt

  • National Credit Act
  • Sequestration
  • Debt Rearrangement Order
  • Judicial Precedent
  • Credit Provider Rights
Read case analysis
Land And Property [2014] ZASCA 56

City of Cape Town v Arun Property Developments (Pty) Ltd (943/12)

City of Cape Town v Arun Property Developments (Pty) Ltd (943/12) [2014] ZASCA 56 (16 April 2014)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
943/12
Judges
Navsa, Ponnan, Theron, Willis, Mathopo

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that section 28 of LUPO does not amount to expropriation and does not entitle the owner to compensation for excess land vested in the local authority upon subdivision. The majority judgment in Helderberg Park Development is binding and establishes that the vesting is limited to the normal need arising from the development, and any dispute regarding excess land should be addressed through administrative remedies such as appeal or review. The court found no factual basis for the existence of excess land and held that the administrative decision approving the sub…

Source excerpt

  • Land Use Planning Ordinance
  • Vesting Of Public Streets
  • Compensation For Expropriation
  • Judicial Precedent
  • Administrative Review
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2012] ZANWHC 35

S v Khanyisile and Another (CA 12/2012)

S v Khanyisile and Another (CA 12/2012) [2012] ZANWHC 35 (19 July 2012)

Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Case number
CA 12/2012
Judges
A A Landman, R D Hendricks

The court held that Botswana is a 'foreign state' under the Extradition Act, as the Treaty between South Africa and Botswana does not provide for reciprocal endorsement of warrants required for 'associated state' status. The magistrate correctly conducted the inquiry under section 10. Concerns regarding corporal punishment, medical care, non-discrimination, and legal representation are not matters for the magistrate under section 10, but for the Minister of Justice to consider under section 11. The Southern African Development Community Protocol on Extradition provides additional safeguards,…

Source excerpt

  • Extradition Act
  • Judicial Precedent
  • Constitutional Rights
  • Corporal Punishment
  • Sadc Protocol On Extradition
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2011] ZAGPJHC 197

Machingawuta and Others v Mogale Alloys (Pty) Ltd and Others (2011/12549)

Machingawuta and Others v Mogale Alloys (Pty) Ltd and Others (2011/12549) [2011] ZAGPJHC 197 (23 September 2011)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2011/12549
Judge
Notshe

The court held that Rule 35(12) does not require relevance or privilege as a limitation for production of documents referred to in pleadings or affidavits. The absence of an express relevance requirement in Rule 35(12), as opposed to other discovery subrules, indicates that any document referred to must be produced unless it is not in the party's possession. The court followed the precedent set by Magnum Aviation Operations v Chairman NTC, as it is binding within the division, and found that the respondents had not discharged their obligation to produce or account for all requested documents.…

Source excerpt

  • Discovery Of Documents
  • Rule 35 12
  • Rule 30a
  • Judicial Precedent
  • Privilege
  • Relevance Of Documents
Read case analysis
Delict [2010] ZAECGHC 72

Mandela v Amsterdam (CA 102/2010)

Mandela v Amsterdam (CA 102/2010) [2010] ZAECGHC 72 (23 August 2010)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown
Case number
CA 102/2010
Judges
Chetty, Beshe

The court held that the cause of action for malicious proceedings arises only after the successful termination of the proceedings in the plaintiff's favour, not when the disciplinary proceedings commence. The magistrate was bound by the decision in Els v Minister of Law and Order and Others and other established authorities, which clearly state that the cause of action accrues upon termination of proceedings. The magistrate's reliance on cases dealing with the prescription of debts under section 12(3) of the Prescription Act was misplaced, as those cases do not address the accrual of a cause…

Source excerpt

  • Malicious Prosecution
  • Prescription Act
  • Actio Iniuriarum
  • Judicial Precedent
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.