South Africa Case Law

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Ndlovu and Others (GP 19/2021)

Special Investigating Unit and Another v Ndlovu and Others (GP 19/2021) [2023] ZAST 2 (31 January 2023)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

GP 19/2021

Judge

L.T Modiba

The Tribunal found that the applicants were entitled to relief under section 18(3) of the Superior Courts Act. The preservation orders remained operative and were not disturbed by the application for leave to appeal. The s18(3) order sought to entrench the status quo that prevailed prior to the 7 June 2022 order, ensuring the preserved assets remained under control and preventing their dissipation. The respondents failed to comply with preservation orders and did not dispute the applicants' version that the assets were proceeds of unlawful activities. The Tribunal held that the Superior Court…

Source excerpt

• Execution Pending Appeal
• Preservation Orders
• Curator Bonis
• Forfeiture Of Assets
• Special Investigating Units Act
• Superior Courts Act Application

Special Investigation Unit v Chachulani Group Investment Holdings and Others (GP15/2021)

Special Investigation Unit v Chachulani Group Investment Holdings and Others (GP15/2021) [2021] ZAST 1 (14 August 2021)

Court

Special Tribunal

Case number

GP15/2021

Judge

L T Modiba

The Special Tribunal has jurisdiction to grant just and equitable relief, including the disgorgement of profits, under section 172(1)(b) of the Constitution. The no-profit principle is not limited to cases where invalidity is suspended; it applies generally to prevent parties from profiting from unlawful contracts. The SIU did not delay unduly in bringing the application, and urgency was established due to the risk of dissipation of funds once FIC directives expired. The ex parte procedure was appropriate given the risk of further dissipation, and the omission of a return date did not prejudi…

Source excerpt

• Public Procurement Irregularities
• Preservation Orders
• No Profit Principle
• Urgency
• Ex Parte Procedure
• Jurisdiction Of Special Tribunal

Oosthuizen v Magistrate for the District of Hermanus and Others (8633/2020)

Oosthuizen v Magistrate for the District of Hermanus and Others (8633/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 138; 2021 (1) SACR 278 (WCC) (29 October 2020)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

8633/2020

Judge

Norton

The court found the search warrant invalid on two principal grounds: first, it failed to indicate with reasonable intelligibility and specificity the nature of the suspected offences, referencing incorrect statutory provisions and creating confusion about the substances involved. Second, the warrant authorised the seizure of an impermissibly broad category of articles, namely 'all electronic equipment', without limiting the search to material relevant to the suspected offences. These defects evidenced a failure by the Magistrate to properly apply his mind and resulted in an unlawful invasion…

Source excerpt

• Search And Seizure
• Drugs And Drug Trafficking Act
• Privacy Rights
• Judicial Review Of Warrants
• Constitutional Invalidity
• Preservation Orders

Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd v Martycel Properties CC and Another (55004/2012)

Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd v Martycel Properties CC and Another (55004/2012) [2017] ZAGPPHC 244 (26 May 2017)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

55004/2012

Judge

Louw

The High Court held that an interim preservation order was interlocutory and not suspended by appeal under section 18 of the Superior Courts Act.

• Interlocutory Orders
• Superior Courts Act Section 18
• Preservation Orders
• Contempt Of Court
• Variation Of Orders
• Civil-procedure

National Director of Public Prosecutions v Kalmar Industries SA (Pty) Ltd (456/2015)

National Director of Public Prosecutions v Kalmar Industries SA (Pty) Ltd (456/2015) [2015] ZAECPEHC 67 (8 December 2015)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth

Case number

456/2015

Judge

C Plasket

The court held that the property in question—the lifting platform and other items—were the very things alleged to have been stolen and not instrumentalities of the offence of theft. For property to qualify as an instrumentality under POCA, it must have been used to commit or facilitate the offence, not merely be the object of the offence. The statutory and jurisdictional requirements for granting a forfeiture order were therefore not met. As a result, the application for a forfeiture order was dismissed and the preservation order discharged.

Source excerpt

• Prevention Of Organised Crime Act
• Forfeiture Orders
• Instrumentality Of Offence
• Preservation Orders
• Theft

Minister of Police and Another v Auction Alliance (Pty) Ltd and Others (1761/2014)

Minister of Police and Another v Auction Alliance (Pty) Ltd and Others (1761/2014) [2014] ZAWCHC 22; [2014] 2 All SA 432 (WCC) (28 February 2014)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

1761/2014

Judge

Rogers

The court held that, due to the prolonged and unacceptable delay in the pending application before the acting magistrate and the uncertainty regarding his continued appointment, it is both permissible and preferable for the applicants to bring a fresh application for a search warrant before a new magistrate. The lis pendens objection was resolved by the applicants' undertaking to withdraw the pending application. The court clarified that applications for search warrants under s 21(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act are not governed by the ordinary rules of civil procedure, and magistrates ar…

Source excerpt

• Search And Seizure
• Preservation Orders
• Lis Pendens
• Magistrates Court Procedure
• Costs Awards