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
3 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Civil Procedure [2021] ZAGPPHC 323

Mogotsi v Absa Bank Limited (68034/2018)

Mogotsi v Absa Bank Limited (68034/2018) [2021] ZAGPPHC 323 (27 May 2021)

The High Court dismissed an unopposed rescission application against summary judgment, finding no basis under Rule 42, Rule 31(2)(b), or common law.

  • Rescission Of Judgment
  • Summary Judgment
  • Uniform Rules Of Court
  • Loan Agreement Default
  • Rescission-of-judgment
  • Summary-judgment
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2010] ZAWCHC 448

Absa Bank Ltd v Kardre Investment CC (13342/10)

Absa Bank Ltd v Kardre Investment CC (13342/10) [2010] ZAWCHC 448 (20 August 2010)

The court found that the respondent failed to disclose a bona fide defence that was good in law. The respondent did not deny that the loans were advanced or that the mortgage bonds were registered. The respondent's complaints regarding vagueness and lack of demand were not sufficient to constitute a defence. The loan agreements stipulated that instalments were payable after registration of the bonds and over a 20-year period. The respondent's affidavit did not raise any material dispute of fact or law that would justify refusing summary judgment. Accordingly, summary judgment was granted in f…

  • Summary Judgment
  • Mortgage Bond Enforcement
  • Loan Agreement Default
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2005] ZAKZHC 3

Citibank NA v Daveglen 1003 Trading CC (03/04/01)

Citibank NA v Daveglen 1003 Trading CC (03/04/01) [2005] ZAKZHC 3 (8 February 2005)

The court found that the respondent failed to pay, secure, or compound the debt after demand, as required by section 69(1)(a) of the Close Corporations Act. The respondent's explanations regarding payment allocation and property ownership were unsupported by evidence and did not rebut the statutory presumption of inability to pay. The respondent did not provide proof of liquid or realizable assets sufficient to discharge its debt. The loan agreement's non-variation clause precluded reliance on extrinsic agreements or allocations. The court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant,…

  • Close Corporations Act
  • Winding Up
  • Deemed Inability To Pay Debts
  • Loan Agreement Default
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.