South Africa Case Law

South African Securitisation Programme (Rf) Limited v Papegaai Liquor Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (2279/2023)

South African Securitisation Programme (Rf) Limited v Papegaai Liquor Investments (Pty) Ltd and Others (2279/2023) [2025] ZAMPMHC 27 (15 May 2025)

Court

Middelburg High Court, Mpumalanga

Case number

2279/2023

Judge

Phahlamohlaka

The High Court dismissed an application to join a third respondent as defendant, finding no direct and substantial interest and awarding costs against the applicant.

• Joinder Of Parties
• Direct And Substantial Interest
• Point In Limine
• Authority To Depose
• Cession Agreement
• Joinder-of-parties

Nkopane v Sol Plaatje Local Municipality and Others (902/2020)

Nkopane v Sol Plaatje Local Municipality and Others (902/2020) [2023] ZANCHC 57 (22 September 2023)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

902/2020

Judge

A Eillert

The court postponed a transfer application after a prescription defence was raised too late, allowing further affidavits and awarding wasted costs against the municipality.

• Prescription Act
• Transfer Of Immovable Property
• Estate Administration
• Point In Limine
• Prescription
• Motion-proceedings

B v B (A3015/2021)

B v B (A3015/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 903 (10 November 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A3015/2021

Judges

Wepener, Van Niewenhuizen

The High Court remitted a maintenance dispute to the magistrate for evidence on when a spousal maintenance claim was referred, after a divorce settlement time limit was disputed.

• Spousal Maintenance
• Settlement Agreement Interpretation
• Maintenance Court Referral
• Point In Limine
• Spousal-maintenance
• Divorce-settlement-agreement

SOHO Nails Waxing Beauty (PTY) Limited v CGS Shopfitters CC (25241/2021)

SOHO Nails Waxing Beauty (PTY) Limited v CGS Shopfitters CC (25241/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 831 (25 October 2022)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

25241/2021

Judge

Dlamini

The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal, finding no reasonable prospects that another court would reach a different view on the rescission issue.

• Leave To Appeal
• Rescission Of Judgment
• Point In Limine
• Default Judgment
• Leave-to-appeal
• Rescission-of-judgment

AB v Commissioner for the South Revenue Service (35476)

AB v Commissioner for the South Revenue Service (35476) [2022] ZATC 9; 85 SATC 377 (23 August 2022)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

35476

Judge

Manoim

The court held that it does not have the power to refer the matter back to SARS for further examination and assessment before the appeal hearing has commenced. Section 129(2)(c) of the Tax Administration Act only permits such referral after the appeal has been heard. The relief sought by SARS is final in effect, as any new assessment would have immediate consequences for the taxpayer and would not be reconsidered in the main proceedings. The absence of pleadings and disputed facts further precludes the granting of the relief at this stage. The point in limine raised by SARS therefore fails.

Source excerpt

• Tax Administration Act
• Referral Back To Commissioner
• Point In Limine
• Final Vs Interim Relief

Acting Municipal Manager and Others v Madibeng Black Business Chamber and Others (11527/22)

Acting Municipal Manager and Others v Madibeng Black Business Chamber and Others (11527/22) [2022] ZAGPPHC 501 (5 July 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

11527/22

Judge

Tlhapi VV

The High Court granted leave to appeal, limited to whether a resolution had to be filed and how Rule 7(1) applied in an urgent application.

• Authority To Institute Proceedings
• Rule 7 Uniform Rules
• Urgent Application
• Point In Limine
• Authority-to-institute-proceedings
• Rule-7-uniform-rules

Dumakude v Nedbank Group (J2383/19)

Dumakude v Nedbank Group (J2383/19) [2022] ZALCJHB 40 (7 March 2022)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J2383/19

Judge

M Makhura

The Labour Court does not have jurisdiction to order the removal of the applicant from the RED listing. The applicant failed to plead any contractual term or breach that would bring the matter within the scope of section 77(3) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act. The RED listing process is regulated by the Financial Sector Regulation Act, which provides for a tribunal to reconsider and remove individuals from RED. The Labour Court's jurisdiction is limited to matters assigned to it by statute, and the relief sought by the applicant does not fall within its jurisdiction. Accordingly, the…

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction Of Labour Court
• Contract Of Employment
• Financial Sector Regulation Act
• Red Listing
• Point In Limine

D.J.D v P.A.G.L (31091/18)

D.J.D v P.A.G.L (31091/18) [2018] ZAGPPHC 543 (25 July 2018)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

31091/18

Judge

Maakane

The court held that a Rule 43 application for interim relief in matrimonial matters can only be launched when there is pending litigation, which requires that divorce summons have been both issued and served on the respondent. The applicant's delay in instituting divorce proceedings was found to be unreasonably long and unexplained, undermining her entitlement to interim relief. The court emphasized the risk of abuse if Rule 43 applications are allowed without actual pending litigation, as parties could obtain interim relief without bona fide intention to pursue divorce proceedings. The point…

Source excerpt

• Rule 43 Interim Relief
• Maintenance Pendente Lite
• Contribution To Legal Costs
• Delay In Instituting Divorce
• Point In Limine
• Costs Order

Maluleke v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (2866/2016)

Maluleke v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others (2866/2016) [2018] ZANWHC 32 (30 January 2018)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

2866/2016

Judge

R D Hendricks

The High Court refused leave to appeal, holding that the citation of a Judge President without the required consent engaged section 47(1) of the Superior Court Act.

• Leave To Appeal
• Section 47 Superior Court Act
• Costs Award
• Citation Of Judges
• Point In Limine
• Leave-to-appeal

GWK Limited v Viljoen N.O. and Others (2304/2017)

GWK Limited v Viljoen N.O. and Others (2304/2017) [2017] ZAECGHC 82 (13 July 2017)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown

Case number

2304/2017

Judge

NG Beshe

The court held that the plaintiff's affidavit, although using the wording "I verily believe", is compliant with Rule 32(2) as interpreted by the Full Bench in Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Carports for Africa CC and Others. The distinction between "belief" and "opinion" is immaterial, and the substance of the affidavit meets the requirements. The defendants' point in limine was dismissed. As no opposing affidavit or application for condonation was filed, and no bona fide defence was disclosed, summary judgment was granted in favour of the plaintiff as prayed.

Source excerpt

• Summary Judgment
• Rule 32 Uniform Rules
• Affidavit Requirements
• Point In Limine