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
2 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
Civil Procedure [2022] ZAGPPHC 957

Liebman v Liebman In re: Liebman v Liebman (24227/2021)

Liebman v Liebman In re: Liebman v Liebman (24227/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 957 (5 December 2022)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
24227/2021
Judge
E van der Schyff

The court found that the respondent, despite protestations of continued domicile in South Africa, had relocated to the United States for medical reasons and to be with family, shipped his assets abroad, and maintained only minimal ties to South Africa. The respondent’s intention to return was not substantiated by facts, and his physical absence was prolonged. The court held that the respondent is a peregrinus, lacking sufficient assets in South Africa to satisfy a potential costs order. Accordingly, the respondent was ordered to furnish security for costs in the sequestration application, wit…

Source excerpt

  • Security For Costs
  • Peregrinus Status
  • Domicile Of Choice
  • Sequestration Application
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2010] ZAFSHC 149

Sharenisa and Others v Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit en Ander (2394/2009)

Sharenisa and Others v Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit en Ander (2394/2009) [2010] ZAFSHC 149 (25 November 2010)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
2394/2009
Judge
D.I. Matlapeng

The court found that the defendants failed to prove that the second plaintiff is a peregrinus. Although there were anomalies in her documentation and suspicions regarding her immigration status, she has resided in the jurisdiction since at least 2005 and maintains a fixed address. The absence of documentary proof from the second plaintiff was noted, but her version was not sufficiently improbable to be rejected outright. The court held that residence must be legally acquired to qualify as an incola, but even if her status is uncertain, the right of access to courts under the Constitution must…

Source excerpt

  • Security For Costs
  • Peregrinus Status
  • Rule 47 Application
  • Burden Of Proof
  • Judicial Discretion
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.