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.T.K v Road Accident Fund (27265/2021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 191 (6 February 2025)
The High Court awarded a Road Accident Fund claimant R2,072,440 for loss of earnings and R6,319.72 for past medical expenses, leaving general damages for later.
Member of Executive Council for Health of the Gauteng Provincial Government v S.N obo N.N (2015/28120) [2024] ZAGPJHC 770 (5 August 2024)
The court found that the proposed separation of issues was neither convenient nor appropriate. The Public Healthcare Defence is not a novel defence but a form of mitigation of damages available under existing law. The issues of the child's needs and the defendant's ability to meet those needs through public healthcare are not discrete and are best determined together. Expert agreement on the child's needs has already been reached on several aspects, and further agreement is likely with proper trial preparation. Separating the quantum into two stages would result in unconscionable delay, preju…
Source excerpt
Mogano v Passenger Rail Agency Of South Africa (2013/43052) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1069 (26 September 2023)
Quantum judgment in a rail injury claim: general damages were agreed and apportioned 50/50, but the plaintiff failed to prove medical expenses and loss of earnings.
Mashinini v Member of the Executive Council for Health and Social Development Gauteng Provincial Government (335/2021) [2023] ZASCA 53; 2023 (5) SA 137 (SCA) (18 April 2023)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the appellant discharged the onus of proving both the need for future medical treatment and the quantum thereof. The respondent failed to adduce any evidence that equivalent medical services would be available in the public sector at no or lesser cost, nor did it rebut the expert evidence presented by the appellant. The public healthcare defence was unsupported by evidence and did not justify compensation in kind. The common law does not require development in this context, and the appellant is entitled to monetary compensation for future medical and hosp…
Source excerpt
Ndobe v Minister of Police (14/22926) [2022] ZAGPPHC 845 (21 October 2022)
The High Court held the Minister of Police liable for loss of income after a seized bakkie was destroyed in a police impound fire, awarding R893,859.
Liberty Group Limited v Plumifon (Pty) Ltd TA Sally Williams Ice Cream and Others (11560/2019) [2021] ZAGPPHC 473 (23 July 2021)
The court found that the applicant properly withdrew its claim against the first respondent, curing any non-joinder issue. The second and third respondents, as sureties and co-principal debtors, remain liable for the damages arising from the holding over of the premises after lease cancellation. The High Court is the appropriate forum as the damages claim was postponed sine die in prior proceedings before this court, and all relevant pleadings and documents are before it. The respondents failed to raise a real, genuine or bona fide dispute of fact regarding the quantum of damages, having not…
Source excerpt
Adapt It (Pty) Ltd v Landis + GYR (Pty) Ltd (23576/2020) [2021] ZAGPPHC 385 (4 June 2021)
High Court summary judgment matter on a services contract: claim 1 succeeded, while claims for damages and future loss were left to trial.
Oryx Properties Limited v Ukuvula Investment Holdings (Pty) Ltd (2014/2017) [2017] ZAECPEHC 51 (3 October 2017)
High Court granted summary judgment on lease arrears and damages, finding the respondent failed to disclose a bona fide defence under Rule 32.
Bernadis-Larratt and Another v Custom Capital (Pty) Ltd (AR 368/16) [2017] ZAKZPHC 63 (27 June 2017)
The court held that the respondent was obliged to take reasonable steps to mitigate its damages after the appellants returned the leased equipment. The respondent failed to take reasonable measures to lease out or sell the equipment in a timely manner, which could have reduced its damages. The acceleration clause, while enforceable, resulted in a disproportionate liability for the appellants given the equipment was returned after only 10 months of a 60-month lease. The court found that the respondent's recovery should be reduced by 50% of the accelerated rental, less the amount realised from…
Source excerpt
Ndubu and Others v First Rand Bank Limited t/a Wesbank (1113/2016) [2017] ZASCA 61 (26 May 2017)
The court found that none of the three offers to purchase the vehicles were rejected by Wesbank or the liquidators. The first offer was withdrawn before any acceptance or rejection, the second was conditional on finance which was not obtained, and the third was submitted after the vehicles had already been sold. The appellants failed to prove any breach or prejudice by Wesbank that would release them from liability as sureties. The court further held that Wesbank complied with its obligations under the Insolvency Act and that the sale of the vehicles was valid. The appellants' miscellaneous d…
Source excerpt
Explore more
