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
ERF 1[...] Barbeque Downs (Pty) Limited v City of Johannesburg (2022/7898) [2025] ZAGPJHC 594 (6 June 2025)
The High Court held that disputed municipal water accounts had prescribed because the applicant properly contested the specific debts under section 102(2).
Lewis Group Limited v Emerald Risk Transfer Proprietary Limited and Others (085183/23) [2025] ZAGPJHC 486 (20 May 2025)
The High Court stayed a business interruption insurance dispute and sent the amount-in-dispute question to arbitration, dismissing the insured’s request to avoid arbitration.
Mbethe v Emalahleni Local Municipality (3747/2020) [2025] ZAMPMBHC 10 (14 March 2025)
The High Court dismissed an application to condone late rescission and set aside a default judgment, finding the delay unexplained and no bona fide defence shown.
Osho Property Ventures (Pty) Limited v Body Corporate Construction Park and Others (46109/2021) [2025] ZAGPPHC 281 (13 March 2025)
The court held that the applicant, as a prospective purchaser, cannot rely on the defence of prescription to limit liability for arrear levies owed to the body corporate. The statutory embargo in section 15B(3) of the Sectional Titles Act entitles the body corporate to refuse to issue a levy clearance certificate until all amounts due are paid, regardless of any contractual arrangements between the applicant and the liquidators. The body corporate is not bound by the sale agreement, as it was not a party to it, and its statutory right to withhold the certificate remains unaltered. The applica…
Source excerpt
Trustees for the Time Being of the Pieter Van der Merwe Trust v 412 Brandfordt CC (A45/2024) [2025] ZAFSHC 30 (14 February 2025)
Appeal against summary judgment in a lease dispute upheld. The court found the defendant trust raised a bona fide defence and was entitled to defend the action.
Befula Investment (Pty) Ltd t/a Rossi Engineering v Transnet Limited (AR333/23; D10584; D5234/2020) [2025] ZAKZPHC 19 (24 January 2025)
The court held that the arbitration process constitutes a single impediment to the running of prescription under section 13(1)(f) of the Prescription Act. Interim awards delivered during the arbitration do not terminate the arbitration process for the purposes of prescription. The penalty awards in favour of Transnet were not contingent on other claims, but the arbitration as a whole had not been finalised. Therefore, prescription remained suspended until the completion of the arbitration, and Transnet was not required to apply to make the interim awards orders of court within one year of the…
Source excerpt
Eight Nine Seven Delville (Pty) Limited v City of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality and Another (30238/2023) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1283 (13 December 2024)
The High Court held that the municipality could not impute tenants’ electricity debts to the property owner and barred disconnections while disputes remained unresolved.
Tarica and Another v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municiaplity (2023/044543) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1261 (6 December 2024)
The court held that the municipality failed to justify disputed billing on a residential account and that older, prescribed charges were unenforceable.
Applemint Properties 108 (Pty) Ltd v Rustenburg Local Municipality and Another (Reasons) (3855/2024) [2024] ZANWHC 249 (25 September 2024)
The court found that the applicant had properly raised a specific dispute regarding the municipal charges, as evidenced by the detailed letter dated 11 October 2023, which enabled the municipality to identify the disputed items and the basis for objection. The court rejected the respondents' argument that the dispute was too general or belated, noting that the municipality's own conduct in investigating the dispute and issuing reconnection instructions confirmed its validity. The court held that the signing of the acknowledgement of debt 'under protest' did not amount to a waiver of the appli…
Source excerpt
Lipton and Others v Activate Telecoms (Pty) Ltd (2022/018723) [2024] ZAGPJHC 853 (29 August 2024)
The applicants failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that the respondent is indebted to them and unable to pay its debts. The alleged loan is disputed on reasonable grounds, including prescription and lack of mora, and the evidence does not support the existence of a recoverable debt. The court found that liquidation proceedings are not appropriate for debt recovery where a bona fide dispute exists. Regarding oppression, the court held that Lipton's continued access to the respondent's bank account and knowledge of its transactions undermines the claim of being locked out or stone…
Source excerpt
Explore more
