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
Brown and Another v Nedbank Limited (1294/2016) [2025] ZAWCHC 145 (24 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application to compel further credit and related relief under a settlement agreement, and ordered the applicants to pay costs.
I.F v B.T.R.C (2021/16497) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1078 (16 September 2024)
Rule 43 application for interim spousal maintenance and bond payments. Cash maintenance was dismissed, but the respondent was ordered to pay the bond, arrears, and a costs contribution.
Garnnett-Adams Properties (Pty) Ltd v Thomas (029983/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 534 (4 June 2024)
The High Court allowed a respondent’s late supplementary affidavit in a sequestration matter because it was material to creditor advantage and caused no undue prejudice.
Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Schutte (14675/20) [2022] ZAGPPHC 433 (9 June 2022)
The court held that the defence of prescription raised by the defendant is not a triable issue, as the law is settled that debts secured by a mortgage bond prescribe after 30 years, regardless of whether the bond has been cancelled. The defendant's reliance on contrary authority was misplaced, as the Supreme Court of Appeal in Botha v Standard Bank of South Africa Ltd confirmed that the cancellation of the bond does not affect the prescription period. The court further found that the certificate of balance provided by the plaintiff constitutes prima facie proof of the amount owed, and the def…
Source excerpt
Standard Bank of South Limited v Eksteen (2020/22001) [2020] ZAGPPHC 705 (8 December 2020)
The court held that Section 11(a)(i) of the Prescription Act is clear and unambiguous: debts secured by a mortgage bond prescribe after thirty years, irrespective of whether the bond is subsequently cancelled or the property sold. The SCA's decision in Botha v Standard Bank confirms that the prescription period is determined by the nature of the instrument, not by the continued existence of the security. The respondent failed to establish a bona fide defence or one that is good in law, as his argument for a three-year prescription period is contrary to binding precedent. The court found no am…
Source excerpt
B.K v Z.K and Others (515/2017) [2018] ZAECGHC 16 (1 March 2018)
The court found that the third respondent had no authority to sell the property, rendering the deed of sale null and void. The subsequent regional court order purporting to ratify the sale was itself a nullity and could not revive the invalid contract. The abstract theory of transfer did not apply because there was no real agreement or intention by the true owners to transfer ownership. Section 28(2) of the Alienation of Land Act was inapplicable as the sale was not signed by the owners or their authorized agent. Consequently, the transfer to the second respondent was invalid, and ownership r…
Source excerpt
Absa Bank Limited v Cholwich (2016/20145) [2017] ZAGPJHC 155 (20 June 2017)
The court held that the plaintiff's inability to attach the original signed loan agreement is not fatal to its claim for summary judgment. The signed mortgage bonds provide sufficient evidence of the defendant's indebtedness and liability, and secondary evidence is admissible where the original contract cannot be found despite a diligent search. The defendant failed to deny the conclusion or terms of the loan agreement, did not dispute the arrears, and did not allege any prejudice from the missing agreement. The defendant did not disclose any bona fide defence or material facts to resist summ…
Source excerpt
Hlatswayo N.O. and Others v Silver Falcon Trading 99 (Pty) Ltd and Others (5047/13) [2015] ZAKZDHC 28 (25 March 2015)
The court found that the applicants' amended relief for a money judgment was not supported by the founding affidavit and amounted to trial by ambush, prejudicing the respondents who had prepared their case based on the original relief sought. The court held that the applicants could not drastically change their relief shortly before the hearing. Regarding the counter-application, the court determined that the first respondent was in substance a partnership and that the relationship between the shareholders had irretrievably broken down, evidenced by years of litigation, criminal complaints, a…
Source excerpt
Fedsure Participation Mortage Bond Managers (Pty) Ltd and Another v Sandlundlu (Pty) Ltd (AR409/12) [2013] ZAKZPHC 54 (18 October 2013)
The court held that Clause 8 of the mortgage bond required a demand before legal costs could be debited to Sandlundlu's account, and no such demand was made. The monthly payments made by Sandlundlu were intended to discharge its interest obligations under the mortgage bond and should have been credited to the bond account, not held in trust. The judgment of 5 August 2002 novated the underlying contractual rights, restricting Fedbond to simple interest at the rate ordered by the court and precluding variation or compounding of interest. The appeal on all grounds failed, and the quantum was ame…
Source excerpt
Scholtz v Scholtz (209/2011) [2012] ZASCA 9; 2012 (5) SA 230 (SCA); [2012] 2 All SA 553 (SCA) (14 March 2012)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the absence of an explicit term regarding liability for the mortgage bond in the deed of donation does not automatically render the donation agreement invalid under s 5 of the General Law Amendment Act 50 of 1956. The court found that material terms may be incorporated by proper interpretation of the express terms or by way of tacit terms, which are considered part of the written agreement. The respondent's defence failed because he did not establish that the omission of the bond liability term rendered the agreement void ab initio. The court set aside th…
Source excerpt
Explore more
