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 [2021] ZAFSHC 187

Visser N.O and Others v Van Niekerk and Others (5937/2016)

Visser N.O and Others v Van Niekerk and Others (5937/2016) [2021] ZAFSHC 187 (5 August 2021)

Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Case number
5937/2016
Judge
Wright AJ

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate that the further particulars requested were strictly necessary for trial preparation as required by Rule 21(2). Many of the requests amounted to attempts to obtain evidence or information that should have been sought through discovery or admissions, not through further particulars. The applicants had ample opportunity during pre-trial conferences and discovery to address any prejudice or insufficiency in the respondents' replies but failed to do so. The delay of almost three years in bringing the application was not adequately explaine…

Source excerpt

  • Rule 21 Further Particulars
  • Pre Trial Procedures
  • Discovery
  • Judicial Discretion
  • Costs Order
Read case analysis
Criminal Law [2004] ZAWCHC 25

S v Orrie and Another (SS 32/2003)

S v Orrie and Another (SS 32/2003) [2004] ZAWCHC 25; 2005 (1) SACR 63 (C); [2005] 2 All SA 212 (C) (14 October 2004)

Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
SS 32/2003
Judge
Bozalek

The court found that the accused was regarded as a suspect by the police and was adequately informed of his status through the details provided regarding the crime and the involvement of his vehicle. The accused was warned of his right to remain silent and to legal representation, but the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that he was informed of the consequences of making a statement or of his right to state-funded legal counsel. The omission to advise the accused of his right to state-funded counsel did not result in prejudice, as he had the means to afford private counsel a…

Source excerpt

  • Admissibility Of Evidence
  • Right To Silence
  • Right To Legal Representation
  • Fair Trial
  • Section 35 Constitution
  • Pre Trial Procedures
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.