South Africa Case Law

Naledi Coal and Logistics Proprietary Limited v Li Coal Clean Coal Gaification Proprietary Limited (Application for Leave to Appeal) (2024/07529)

Naledi Coal and Logistics Proprietary Limited v Li Coal Clean Coal Gaification Proprietary Limited (Application for Leave to Appeal) (2024/07529) [2025] ZAGPJHC 723 (23 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/07529

Judge

Pearse AJ

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against an order requiring reimbursement of coal transport costs, finding no reasonable prospect of success.

• Leave To Appeal Test
• Breach Of Contract
• Agency And Mandate
• Arbitration Clause
• Motion Proceedings
• Plascon Evans Rule

Sable Place Properties 106 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Visa Security Group (Pty) Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (081761-2025)

Sable Place Properties 106 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Visa Security Group (Pty) Ltd and Another (Leave to Appeal) (081761-2025) [2025] ZAGPPHC 764 (18 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

081761-2025

Judge

Minnaar

The High Court dismissed Visa Security Group’s leave to appeal against an urgent interdict and ejectment order, finding no reasonable prospects of success.

• Leave To Appeal
• Final Interdict
• Dispute Of Fact
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Urgent Application
• Leave-to-appeal

Zana v Gwanzura (Leave to Appeal) (2025-068106)

Zana v Gwanzura (Leave to Appeal) (2025-068106) [2025] ZAGPPHC 710 (17 July 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

2025-068106

Judge

S. Potterill

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal in a child relocation dispute, finding no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different result.

• Relocation Of Child
• Family Advocate Report
• Lis Pendens
• Urgency
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Child-relocation

Sumeil (Pty) Ltd v Coogal Finance (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Others (1140/2023)

Sumeil (Pty) Ltd v Coogal Finance (Pty) Ltd (In Liquidation) and Others (1140/2023) [2025] ZASCA 27 (28 March 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

1140/2023

Judges

Zondi AP, Koen JA, Coppin JA, Phatshoane AJJA, Bloem AJJA

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that set-off could only operate in respect of mutual debts that existed and were due at the deemed date of liquidation. Sumeil admitted owing Coogal R185 000 on that date, but the evidence showed Coogal owed Sumeil a greater amount, resulting in set-off extinguishing Sumeil's liability for that sum. The balloon payments under the master rental agreements were not yet due at the deemed date of liquidation and thus could not be set off. Furthermore, Coogal and its liquidator failed to make out a case for payment of the balloon amounts, as they did not tender rec…

Source excerpt

• Set Off
• Executory Contracts
• Reciprocal Obligations
• Liquidation Proceedings
• Plascon Evans Rule

Maru Spaces Consortium v Gauteng Provincial Government Department of Infrastructure Development (2023/1880)

Maru Spaces Consortium v Gauteng Provincial Government Department of Infrastructure Development (2023/1880) [2025] ZAGPJHC 192 (26 February 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/1880

Judge

Barnes

The Respondent failed to comply with the pre-conditions for arbitration as stipulated in the Service Level Agreement, and thus its special plea of arbitration was correctly dismissed. The supplementary affidavit of the Applicant was considered by both parties as admitted, and no objection was raised; the court's oversight in not formally admitting it is corrected by amending the order. There were no real factual disputes requiring the application of the Plascon-Evans rule, as the Respondent's defence did not rise to a legally cognisable level. Reliance on the KwaZulu-Natal Joint Liaison Commi…

Source excerpt

• Arbitration Clauses
• Service Level Agreement
• Leave To Appeal
• Admission Of Affidavits
• Plascon Evans Rule

Gold Leaf Tobacco Corporate (Pty) Ltd v Sasfin Bank Ltd (2022/21063)

Gold Leaf Tobacco Corporate (Pty) Ltd v Sasfin Bank Ltd (2022/21063) [2025] ZAGPJHC 32 (24 January 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/21063

Judge

Esterhuizen

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant failed to show reasonable prospects of success or any other compelling reason to appeal.

• Leave To Appeal
• Reasonable Prospect Of Success
• Superior Courts Act
• Motion Proceedings
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Leave-to-appeal

Bloemfontein South High School Governing Body v MEC: Free State Department of Education and Others (2056/2024)

Bloemfontein South High School Governing Body v MEC: Free State Department of Education and Others (2056/2024) [2024] ZAFSHC 383 (29 November 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

2056/2024

Judge

JP Daffue

A school governing body sought to compel appointment of its recommended deputy principal candidate, but the court held a final delegated decision had already been taken and dismissed the application with costs.

• Employment Of Educators Act
• Delegation Of Authority
• Mandamus
• Declaratory Relief
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Administrative-law

Nedbank Limited v Coetzee and Others (2022/025839)

Nedbank Limited v Coetzee and Others (2022/025839) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1085 (18 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2022/025839

Judge

G S Myburgh

Applying the Plascon Evans rule, the court found that the applicant did not discharge the onus of proving that its representative made a timeous bid prior to the fall of the hammer. The evidence of the sheriff and third respondent was not inherently implausible and, on the crucial issue, there was insufficient difference between the parties' versions to justify a finding in favour of the applicant. The application was therefore dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Sale In Execution
• Onus Of Proof
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Auction Procedure

Rama Annadale Mononde Attorneys v Bekker N.O and Another (Leave to Appeal) (34145/2020)

Rama Annadale Mononde Attorneys v Bekker N.O and Another (Leave to Appeal) (34145/2020) [2024] ZAGPPHC 652 (2 July 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

34145/2020

Judge

P J M Mogotsi

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospect that another court would differ on affidavit evidence, hearsay, or a payment amount error.

• Leave To Appeal
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Hearsay Evidence
• Typographical Error In Order
• Leave-to-appeal
• Plascon-evans-rule

Venter and Another v Astfin (SA) (Pty) Limited and Others (2021/25209)

Venter and Another v Astfin (SA) (Pty) Limited and Others (2021/25209) [2024] ZAGPJHC 324 (28 March 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/25209

Judge

P V Ternent

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal and ordered the first applicant to pay costs on an attorney-client scale.

• Leave To Appeal
• Costs Order
• Disputes Of Fact
• Plascon Evans Rule
• Leave-to-appeal
• Costs-order