South Africa Case Law

Transmed South Africa Holdings (Pty) v Schaffner and Others (2023/084393)

Transmed South Africa Holdings (Pty) v Schaffner and Others (2023/084393) [2024] ZAGPJHC 482 (16 May 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/084393

Judge

Dlamini

The court found that the review application was filed one day late but condonation was justified and granted under section 38 of the Arbitration Act. On the merits, the court held that the appeal tribunal did not commit a gross irregularity or exceed its powers. The arbitrator erred by making a finding on a contract not pleaded, and the appeal tribunal correctly set aside the arbitrator's award. The alleged failure to consider all evidence did not amount to a gross irregularity, as the appeal tribunal assessed the evidence and was entitled to make its own evaluation. The review application wa…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act Section 33
• Condonation For Late Filing
• Gross Irregularity
• Arbitrator Jurisdiction
• Party Autonomy
• Counterapplication For Enforcement

Altech Radio Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Aeonova360 Management Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/001585)

Altech Radio Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Aeonova360 Management Services (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/001585) [2023] ZAGPJHC 1082 (28 September 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/001585

Judge

Moorcroft

Leave to appeal was dismissed in an arbitration matter, with the court finding no reasonable prospects of success and no gross irregularity.

• Arbitration Act Section 33
• Gross Irregularity Review
• Leave To Appeal Test
• Party Autonomy
• Interpretation Of Contracts
• Leave-to-appeal

Close-Up Mining (Pty) Ltd and Others v The Arbitrator, Judge Phillip Boruchowitz and Another (286/2022)

Close-Up Mining (Pty) Ltd and Others v The Arbitrator, Judge Phillip Boruchowitz and Another (286/2022) [2023] ZASCA 43; 2023 (4) SA 38 (SCA) (31 March 2023)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

286/2022

Judges

Van der Merwe, Mocumie, Meyer, Matojane, Unterhalter

The SCA held that an arbitrator’s power depends on the arbitration agreement and AFSA rules, and dismissed a challenge based on an unpleaded repudiation defence.

• Arbitration Review
• Gross Irregularity
• Party Autonomy
• Pleadings
• Specific Performance
• Arbitration-review

Aveng Africa (Pty) Ltd v Seventy Five on Maude (Pty) Ltd and Another (13909/21)

Aveng Africa (Pty) Ltd v Seventy Five on Maude (Pty) Ltd and Another (13909/21) [2022] ZAGPJHC 352 (24 May 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

13909/21

Judge

M.L. Senyatsi

The High Court dismissed a review of an arbitral award, holding that the arbitrator did not exceed his powers and no gross irregularity was shown.

• Arbitration Act Review
• Gross Irregularity
• Exceeding Powers
• Building Contract Dispute
• Penalty Clause
• Party Autonomy

Pop-up Trading 39 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Super Group Holdings (Pty) Limited and Another (14544/2020)

Pop-up Trading 39 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Super Group Holdings (Pty) Limited and Another (14544/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 575 (20 October 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

14544/2020

Judge

Twala M L

High Court review of an arbitration award under the Arbitration Act was upheld because the arbitrator ignored the contract’s expert-determination clause.

• Arbitration Review
• Gross Irregularity
• Contractual Interpretation
• Party Autonomy
• Claw Back Mechanism
• Arbitration-review

Eskom Holdings Limited v The Joint Venture of Edison Jehano (Pty) Ltd and KEC International Limited and Others (177/2020)

Eskom Holdings Limited v The Joint Venture of Edison Jehano (Pty) Ltd and KEC International Limited and Others (177/2020) [2021] ZASCA 138 (6 October 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

177/2020

Judges

Dambuza, Makgoka, Nicholls, Gorven, Eksteen

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the arbitrator did not commit a gross irregularity nor exceed his powers under section 33(1)(b) of the Arbitration Act. The arbitrator considered the pleadings and schedules submitted by both parties and applied the time-bar clauses to all 13 claims, as was argued before him. The Joint Venture was aware of the time-bar defence and had the opportunity to address it. The arbitrator's determination was consistent with the principle of party autonomy and the requirements of speed, efficiency, flexibility, fairness, and finality in arbitration. There was no e…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act 1965
• Gross Irregularity
• Exceeding Powers
• Time Bar Clauses
• Party Autonomy
• Review Of Arbitral Award

Samancor Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others v Samancor Chrome Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Another (357/2020)

Samancor Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others v Samancor Chrome Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Another (357/2020) [2021] ZASCA 60; [2021] 3 All SA 342 (SCA); 2021 (6) SA 380 (SCA) (24 May 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

357/2020

Judges

Navsa, Saldulker, Mbatha, Ledwaba, Rogers

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the High Court correctly exercised its discretion under s 8 of the Arbitration Act to grant an extension of time for the respondents to initiate arbitration proceedings. The respondents could not have known of the tax claim before the expiry of the time-bar due to the appellants' late and inaccurate submission of the tax return. The delay in bringing the s 8 application was not fatal, as the respondents had raised the issue promptly in pleadings and the appellants suffered no relevant prejudice. The time-bar clause was subject to s 8, and the hardship to…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Act Section 8
• Contractual Time Bar
• Undue Hardship
• Tax Indemnity
• Interpretation Of Contract
• Party Autonomy

IDS Industry Service and Plant Construction South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Industrius D.O.O (15862/2020)

IDS Industry Service and Plant Construction South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Industrius D.O.O (15862/2020) [2021] ZAGPJHC 375 (28 April 2021)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

15862/2020

Judge

F Bezuidenhout

The High Court refused security for costs in an international arbitration enforcement dispute, holding the IAA and Model Law did not permit it on these facts.

• International Arbitration Act
• Security For Costs
• Enforcement Of Arbitral Award
• Peregrinus Incola Distinction
• Party Autonomy
• Bill Of Rights Interpretation

Icon Earthworks (Pty) Ltd v Caliber 293 (Pty) Ltd and Another (10086/2019)

Icon Earthworks (Pty) Ltd v Caliber 293 (Pty) Ltd and Another (10086/2019) [2020] ZAGPPHC 661 (28 October 2020)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

10086/2019

Judge

G.T. Avvakoumides

The High Court dismissed a review of an arbitral award, holding that alleged errors of fact or law and disputed findings did not amount to reviewable irregularities.

• Arbitration Act Section 33
• Gross Irregularity
• Misconduct Of Arbitrator
• Party Autonomy
• Finality Of Arbitral Award
• Arbitration-review

Hemmingways Shopping Centre (Pty) Ltd v P D Naidoo & Associates Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd and Another (2013/42685)

Hemmingways Shopping Centre (Pty) Ltd v P D Naidoo & Associates Consulting Engineers (Pty) Ltd and Another (2013/42685) [2017] ZAGPJHC 377 (11 June 2017)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2013/42685

Judge

Victor

The court found that the arbitrator had acted fairly and within his discretion, having allowed the applicant multiple opportunities to amend its claim and lead evidence over a protracted period. The applicant failed to demonstrate that the refusal to reopen its case caused substantial procedural unfairness or that the evidence sought to be introduced was sufficiently material to justify intervention. The court emphasized the principle of party autonomy in arbitration and the limited grounds for judicial interference, noting that the arbitrator's ruling was neither arbitrary nor contrary to pu…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Review
• Procedural Fairness
• Reopening Of Case
• Arbitrator Discretion
• Party Autonomy