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
Mashinini v Minister of Correctional Services and Another (Ex Tempore) (2023-098939) [2025] ZAGPPHC 772 (30 July 2025)
Urgent contempt application over non-release on parole dismissed because the Minister was not cited personally and non-compliance was not shown to be mala fide.
Ndlovu v Bothma and Others (67546/2018) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1107 (24 October 2024)
The court found that the first and fourth respondents failed to comply with the court order of 15 June 2023 by not providing the required statement of account and supporting documents, including bank statements. The respondents did not offer any valid reasons for their non-compliance. The court concluded that the non-compliance was both wilful and mala fide, satisfying the requirements for contempt of court as set out in Fakie NO v CCII Systems (Pty) Ltd. Accordingly, the first respondent was found guilty of contempt and an order for his committal to imprisonment was granted, suspended for th…
Source excerpt
Cornelissen Incorporated v Nama Khoi Local Municipality (2754/2016) [2023] ZANCHC 28 (15 June 2023)
The High Court granted leave to amend particulars of claim in an attorney-fees dispute, finding the changes supplemented rather than replaced the existing cause of action.
K v K (8285/2022) [2022] ZAGPJHC 736 (3 October 2022)
The court found that the respondent was aware of the court order and deliberately refused to comply with its terms, including disclosure of the children's address, alternate week care, and daily contact. The respondent's explanations for non-compliance, based on alleged abuse and safety concerns, were found to lack credibility and were contradicted by evidence, including the testimony of the children's nanny and prior settlement agreements. The respondent's conduct was held to be wilful and mala fide, satisfying the requirements for contempt of court. The applicant did not make out a case for…
Source excerpt
Sefokolo v Rand Plastics and Others (J1418-20) [2022] ZALCJHB 18 (23 February 2022)
The court found that the respondents had fully complied with the monetary aspect of the arbitration award by paying the applicant the ordered backpay. Regarding reinstatement, the respondents attempted to reinstate the applicant but the original position was no longer available due to restructuring. An alternative position was created for the applicant, which he refused. The respondents' conduct was not wilful or mala fide, and they acted in good faith to comply with the award as far as possible. The court held that substantial compliance was achieved and that the respondents could not be hel…
Source excerpt
Mduli v Mzila Security Services and Another (J898-21) [2022] ZALCJHB 19 (23 February 2022)
The Labour Court dismissed a contempt application, finding the respondents’ non-compliance with a settlement agreement was not wilful or mala fide.
CT Med and Trauma (Pty) Ltd t/a Cape Medics v Airports Company South Africa Soc Limited and Others (41126/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 583 (21 October 2021)
The High Court granted leave to appeal on whether the respondents’ non-compliance with a court order was wilful and mala fide, and costs were reserved for the appeal.
Democratic Alliance v President of the Republic of South Africa and Another (5950/2017) [2017] ZAWCHC 34 (31 March 2017)
The High Court dismissed the DA’s urgent bid to stop the cabinet reshuffle, finding no strong factual basis for interim relief pending review.
Kontonminas v Duzi Retailer CC t/a Tops at Duzi Spar and Another (3488/16) [2016] ZAKZPHC 97 (31 October 2016)
The court found that the first respondent's liquor licence was issued irregularly under repealed legislation and that it was trading from premises not covered by the licence, constituting an ongoing illegality. The applicant's efforts to engage the Liquor Authority were futile, and the Authority's conduct was ambivalent and unresponsive. The requirement to exhaust internal remedies was not absolute in these circumstances, and the applicant was justified in approaching the court directly. The finding of mala fides and the punitive costs order were upheld due to the first respondent's misleadin…
Source excerpt
Impregilo Spa v Mahamba In re: Mahamba v Impregilo Spa (44528/10) [2012] ZAGPJHC 194 (11 October 2012)
The High Court granted the defendant leave to amend its plea in a contract dispute, finding no mala fides and no irreparable prejudice to the plaintiff.
Explore more
