South Africa Case Law

Mvenya v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another (46591/2021)

Mvenya v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another (46591/2021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 740 (24 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

46591/2021

Judge

Van Aswegen

The application for leave to appeal does not meet the statutory threshold under section 17(1)(a)(i) of the Superior Courts Act, as the Appellant failed to demonstrate that another court would come to a different conclusion. The grounds of appeal were not clearly articulated in compliance with Rule 49(4), consisting mainly of broad assertions and unsubstantiated criticisms. The Appellant's defences of securitisation, estoppel, and debt risk insurance were speculative, lacked factual support, and were not pleaded with sufficient particularity. The summary judgment order and declaration of execu…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Summary Judgment
• Mortgage Bond Enforcement
• Rule 46a Execution
• Reserve Price Setting
• Locus Standi

Rogal Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others v Naidoo and Others (2023/066197)

Rogal Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others v Naidoo and Others (2023/066197) [2025] ZAGPPHC 695 (7 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023/066197

Judge

N.N BAM

The High Court dismissed leave to appeal, holding there were no reasonable prospects of success on condonation, FRB’s interest, executory sale issues, or discretion arguments.

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Condonation
• Executory Contracts
• Liquidation And Winding Up
• Judicial Discretion
• Leave-to-appeal

Maximum Profit Recovery (Pty) Ltd v Mogalakwena Local Municipality and Others (Leave to Appeal) (13528/2022)

Maximum Profit Recovery (Pty) Ltd v Mogalakwena Local Municipality and Others (Leave to Appeal) (13528/2022) [2025] ZALMPPHC 38 (28 February 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

13528/2022

Judge

Mashamba

The High Court refused leave to appeal in a tender review dispute, finding no reasonable prospects of success and upholding the costs order against the applicant.

• Public Procurement
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Costs Award
• Tender Disqualification

Seboni N.O and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Others (Leave to Appeal) (18797/2021)

Seboni N.O and Another v ABSA Bank Limited and Others (Leave to Appeal) (18797/2021) [2025] ZAGPPHC 6 (17 January 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

18797/2021

Judge

Gwala AJ

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the seventh respondent failed to show reasonable prospects of success in a fraud-tainted property transfer dispute.

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Fraudulent Transfer
• Abstract Theory Of Transfer
• Bona Fide Purchaser
• Setting Aside Documents
• Leave-to-appeal

Mvula v City of Cape Town and Others (Leave to Appeal) (8583/24)

Mvula v City of Cape Town and Others (Leave to Appeal) (8583/24) [2024] ZAWCHC 420 (11 December 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8583/24

Judge

S G Magardie

Leave to appeal was refused in a vehicle-impoundment dispute. The court held that microdot evidence identified the vehicle as the SADTF vehicle and rejected a new fairness argument.

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Impoundment Of Vehicle
• Ownership Dispute
• Procedural Fairness
• Superior Courts Act
• Microdot Identification

Kriel v Road Accident Fund (Leave to Appeal) (4477/2021)

Kriel v Road Accident Fund (Leave to Appeal) (4477/2021) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1230 (28 November 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

4477/2021

Judge

Mahomed

The High Court refused leave to appeal in a Road Accident Fund matter, finding the applicant had not met the section 17 threshold.

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Road Accident Claims
• Curatorship
• Causal Negligence
• Evidence Assessment
• Leave-to-appeal

Erasmus v First Rand Bank Limited (Leave to Appeal) (27120/2017)

Erasmus v First Rand Bank Limited (Leave to Appeal) (27120/2017) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1054 (16 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

27120/2017

Judge

Strydom

The High Court refused Nicolette Erasmus leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects of success and declining to award punitive costs.

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Credit Facility Contracts
• National Credit Act Compliance
• Costs Orders
• Leave-to-appeal
• Credit-facility-contracts

De Klerk and Others v Opperman (29052/2018)

De Klerk and Others v Opperman (29052/2018) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1008 (7 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

29052/2018

Judge

Mahomed

Leave to appeal was dismissed in a wills dispute, with the court upholding findings on testamentary capacity, expert evidence, and hearsay admissibility.

• Testamentary Capacity
• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Expert Evidence
• Hearsay Evidence
• Undue Influence
• Costs Order

Caterpillar Financial Services of SA (Pty) Ltd v Mashele Projects and Services (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (5209/2023)

Caterpillar Financial Services of SA (Pty) Ltd v Mashele Projects and Services (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (5209/2023) [2024] ZAMPMHC 56 (2 October 2024)

Court

Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

5209/2023

Judge

Langa

The High Court dismissed Mashele Projects’ leave-to-appeal application and granted Caterpillar’s section 18(3) execution relief over six Caterpillar units.

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Rei Vindicatio
• Section 18 Execution
• Urgent Application
• Attorney And Client Costs
• Leave-to-appeal

Servsol Software Solutions CC and Others v Emisha Software (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (2023/069011)

Servsol Software Solutions CC and Others v Emisha Software (Pty) Ltd (Leave to Appeal) (2023/069011) [2024] ZAGPPHC 950 (18 September 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2023/069011

Judge

Ntlama-Makhanya

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate reasonable prospects of success on appeal as required by section 17(1) of the Superior Courts Act. The applicants conceded that the IGS program is dormant and not in use, rendering the dispute moot and lacking practical effect. The interdict granted in the main judgment was legitimate and necessary to prevent future interference with the IGS program. The arguments regarding the Plascon Evans rule, jurisdiction, and consideration of abandoned prayers were fully addressed in the main judgment and did not establish any material misdirecti…

Source excerpt

• Leave To Appeal Standard
• Final Interdict
• Copyright Infringement
• Mootness
• Costs Award