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
M.B.M obo M.M v Elevator Maintenance Company (26267/21) [2022] ZAGPPHC 256 (8 March 2022)
The court upheld an exception to a negligence claim for failure to plead a legal duty, but dismissed an exception based on Rule 18(10) in a minor injury damages action.
Legal Practice Council v Louw (8831/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 796 (26 November 2021)
The High Court upheld an exception, finding no pleaded legal duty on the Legal Practice Council to give the plaintiff personal legal guidance.
Paymate (Pty) Ltd v Louis and Another (13927/2009) [2015] ZAWCHC 33 (27 March 2015)
The High Court dismissed Paymate’s claim against its attorney for allegedly misapplying a trust deposit, finding the plaintiff failed to prove the mandate terms.
Du Plessis v S (A136/2014) [2014] ZAGPPHC 939 (17 November 2014)
Criminal appeal over defeating the administration of justice. The High Court held the charge sheet was defective for omitting a legal duty and set aside the conviction.
Jaffit v Garlicke & Bousfield Inc and Others (10142/2010, 10146/2010, 10144/2010, 10145/2010, 10186/2010, 858/2011) [2012] ZAKZPHC 1; 2012 (2) SA 562 (KZP); [2012] 2 All SA 95 (KZP) (27 January 2012)
The court dismissed an exception to a third-party notice, holding that pleaded facts could support a legal duty on the third parties to warn of irregular conduct.
Du Preez and Others v Zwiegers (61/07) [2008] ZASCA 42; 2008 (4) SA 627 (SCA); [2008] 3 All SA 425 (SCA) (28 March 2008)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the respondent attorney owed a legal duty to the corporation as the depositor of the trust account funds, even though the corporation was not his client. The respondent's failure to contact the corporation or its attorneys to confirm instructions regarding the disposal of the funds constituted negligence. The court rejected the notion that the attorney could lawfully ignore the depositor's interests simply because his client provided instructions. The damages suffered were directly attributable to the respondent's negligent conduct, and the corporation's…
Source excerpt
Minister of Law and Order v Kadir (246/93) [1994] ZASCA 138; 1995 (1) SA 303 (AD); [1995] 1 All SA 457 (A) (29 September 1994)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the facts pleaded by the plaintiff did not prima facie support the existence of a legal duty owed by the police to the plaintiff to record information about the offending vehicle and its driver. The court distinguished the present case from Minister van Polisie v Ewels, noting that the omission in question was not directly related to the statutory duty to prevent crime, but rather to the collection of information that might assist a civil litigant. The court found that the functions of the police are primarily related to criminal matters and are not desig…
Source excerpt
Explore more
