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
Standard Bank of South Africa v Hendricks (11184/2018) [2025] ZAWCHC 280 (9 July 2025)
The court granted standard-bank execution against a primary residence, finding mortgage and municipal arrears substantial, alternatives exhausted, and execution proportionate.
Manqele and Another v SB Guarentee Company (RF) (Pty) Ltd and Another (2023/050021) [2025] ZAGPJHC 381 (24 March 2025)
The court found that the sheriff's return of service, while prima facie evidence, was not conclusive in this case. Mr Manqele provided credible and corroborated evidence that he was not present at the property on the alleged service date, thus discharging the onus on a balance of probabilities. The sheriff's affidavit lacked sufficient verification of identity, and the supporting evidence did not establish personal service. As a result, the default judgment and writ of execution were erroneously granted and must be rescinded. Furthermore, since the money judgment against Ms Magakoa was inextr…
Source excerpt
Firstrand Bank Limited v Mokone (24509/2022) [2025] ZAGPPHC 104 (31 January 2025)
The court granted summary judgment in a mortgage enforcement matter, upheld section 129 compliance, and ordered execution against the defendant’s property.
Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Motha and Another (6692/2015) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1191 (19 November 2024)
Default judgment was granted on a home loan claim, with the respondents’ primary residence declared specially executable and sold in execution without a reserve price.
Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa v Steenkamp N.O and Others (1204/2021) [2024] ZANCHC 53 (31 May 2024)
The court held that Uniform Rule 46A applies to execution against immovable property owned by a trust if the property is used as a primary residence by natural persons, such as trust beneficiaries or employees. The decisive factor is the use of the property for residential purposes, not the legal persona of the owner. The applicant failed to comply with Rule 46A, and the application to declare the properties executable cannot proceed without judicial oversight. The respondents' force majeure defence was not seriously pursued and did not bar the money claim. However, both the monetary claim an…
Source excerpt
Changing Tides 17 (Pty) Ltd N.O v Ralutanda (20449/2021) [2023] ZAGPPHC 1878 (10 November 2023)
The High Court postponed a Rule 46A default judgment application, finding the matter could not be decided on an uncommissioned answering statement.
Absa Bank Limited v Malatji (39791/2016) [2023] ZAGPJHC 945 (27 August 2023)
The court declared the respondent’s primary residence specially executable under Rule 46A and set a reserve price after finding no viable alternative to execution.
Andtash (Pty) Limited v Olivier and Another (2022/010613) [2023] ZAGPJHC 502 (17 May 2023)
The High Court enforced a loan agreement, rejected a dismissal-based impossibility defence, and declared the respondents’ home executable subject to a reserve price.
Nedbank Limited v D and Another (5700/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 331 (22 November 2022)
High Court summary judgment in favour of Nedbank on loan and suretyship debts, with the defendants' special pleas rejected and property declared specially executable.
Investec Bank Limited v Abada (30528/2021) [2022] ZAGPPHC 776 (20 October 2022)
The High Court enforced a home loan and credit facility debt, dismissed technical defences, and declared the respondent’s primary residence specially executable.
Explore more
