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
Seeletso and Another v Ntefeng and Others (UM 170/23) [2023] ZANWHC 157 (6 September 2023)
The court dismissed a Rule 30/30A challenge to an urgent application, held those rules can apply in application proceedings, and set deadlines for further affidavits.
Essa v Judicial Commission of Inquiry into State Capture and Another (2022/009834) [2023] ZAGPJHC 883 (4 August 2023)
The court found that the conduct and remarks of the presiding judge during argument did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias in the mind of a reasonable, objective, and informed person. The judge's engagement with counsel, including expressing views on the sufficiency of counsel's unavailability as a ground for postponement and inquiries regarding compliance with practice directives, constituted active participation and not pre-determination. The judge made clear that his views were prima facie and subject to persuasion, and he had not pre-judged the application. The allegation that t…
Source excerpt
Emerald Safari Resort (Pty) Ltd v Bartie (2019/21688) [2023] ZAGPJHC 859 (2 August 2023)
High Court costs ruling after trial-roll removal for failure to upload a joint practice note timeously under the Judge President’s Practice Directive.
Makhomisani N.O. and Another v SB Guarantee Company (RF) (PTY) Limited (2019/41752) [2022] ZAGPJHC 179 (23 March 2022)
The court held that a prior dismissal of the applicants’ rescission application was final and declined to reinstate it. The application was dismissed with costs.
Mdunge v Ubuhlebenzwe Municipality and Others (14159/17P) [2019] ZAKZPHC 1 (21 January 2019)
The court found that the first respondent lacked the legal authority to dismiss the applicant as ward councillor, as such power resides with the fourth respondent under the Municipal Systems Act. The resolution and subsequent dismissal were invalid and of no force or effect. However, the first respondent later rescinded its decision and reinstated the applicant, rendering the review application moot. The applicant was justified in approaching the court for relief until the rescission, but should have withdrawn the application thereafter. The court held that costs should be limited to those in…
Source excerpt
Harris and Another v Burger N.O. and Another (786/2017) [2017] ZAFSHC 133 (21 August 2017)
The Free State High Court granted leave to appeal after finding it had wrongly heard an opposed matter on the unopposed motion roll.
Explore more
