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
Bright Ideas Projects 860 CC and Another v Matsapa Trading 647 CC and Others (631/2024) [2025] ZANCHC 30 (28 March 2025)
Leave to appeal was granted in a spoliation dispute over possession of a fuel station and shop business, because the appeal had a reasonable prospect of success.
Ferreira Equestrian Centre (Pty) Ltd v Spies and Another - Leave for Appeal (400/2023) [2023] ZAFSHC 164 (15 May 2023)
The High Court dismissed an opposed application for leave to appeal against a spoliation order restoring access to polo fields in Harrismith.
Ferreira Equestrian Centre (Pty) Ltd v Spies and Another (400/2023) [2023] ZAFSHC 167 (8 May 2023)
The High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal against a spoliation order, finding no reasonable prospects of success and awarding costs.
Silverglade (Edms) Bpk v Wessels and Another (5946/2008) [2008] ZAFSHC 138 (11 December 2008)
High Court application for a mandament van spolie over access to a farm gate was dismissed after the court found no unlawful dispossession on the respondent's version.
Homefront Trading 2 BK and Another v Palm (13538/07) [2007] ZAGPHC 32 (18 April 2007)
Urgent spoliation application failed because the applicants did not prove possession of jewellery and documents on a balance of probabilities.
Van Jaarsveld v Minister van Veiligheid en Sekuriteit (230/05) [2006] ZANCHC 10 (24 February 2006)
The court ordered the return of seized sheep to the applicant, holding that section 31(1)(a) turns on lawful possession, not ownership.
Verenigende Gereformeerde Kerk in Suider-Afrika (The Uniting Reformed Church in Southern Africa alias Uniting Church of SA) v Malebo and Another (A560/2003) [2005] ZAFSHC 32 (3 March 2005)
The High Court dismissed an appeal against a counter-order in church property litigation, holding that the original application was not a spoliation claim.
Explore more
