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
3 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
Administrative Law [2013] ZAGPJHC 282

Property Promotions & Management (Pty) Ltd and Others v Securities Regulation Panel and Others (2011/6086)

Property Promotions & Management (Pty) Ltd and Others v Securities Regulation Panel and Others (2011/6086) [2013] ZAGPJHC 282 (15 November 2013)

Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2011/6086
Judge
C. J. Claassen

The High Court dismissed a review of the SRP ruling, holding that the only surviving applicant lacked locus standi because it was not a shareholder when the offer obligation arose.

  • Companies Act 1973
  • Mandatory Offer
  • Affected Transaction
  • Locus Standi
  • Takeover Regulation
  • Review Of Administrative Action
Read case analysis
Competition Law [2011] ZACT 26

Hosken Consolidated Investments Ltd v KWV Holdings Ltd (26/LM/Apr11)

Hosken Consolidated Investments Ltd v KWV Holdings Ltd (26/LM/Apr11) [2011] ZACT 26 (6 May 2011)

Court
Competition Tribunal
Case number
26/LM/Apr11
Judges
Norman Manoim, Yasmin Carrim, Andreas Wessels

The Competition Tribunal approved HCI’s acquisition of an additional 0.05% stake in KWV, finding no competition overlap, no public interest concerns, and no conditions were needed.

  • Large Merger
  • Mandatory Offer
  • Sole Control
  • Public Interest
  • Market Definition
  • Large-merger
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2000] ZASCA 1

Sefalana Employee Benefits Organisation v Haslam and Others (553/97)

Sefalana Employee Benefits Organisation v Haslam and Others (553/97) [2000] ZASCA 1; 2000 (2) SA 415 (SCA); [2000] JOL 6205 (A) (3 March 2000)

Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Case number
553/97
Judges
Smalberger, Marais, Zulman, Plewman, Melunsky

The court held that no mandatory takeover offer arose because the share transaction was repudiated and never implemented, so control never changed.

  • Takeover Regulation
  • Mandatory Offer
  • Minority Shareholder Rights
  • Statutory Interpretation
  • Securities Regulation
  • Takeover-regulation
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.