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
Sigogo (2025-117399), Ex parte [2025] ZAGPPHC 769 (30 July 2025)
The High Court dismissed an urgent ex parte application to preserve estate funds and obtain bank statements, holding that the applicant lacked locus standi.
Fongoqa v Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa and Another (2019/11384) [2022] ZAGPJHC 183 (29 March 2022)
The court found that the plaintiff's evidence regarding the shooting incident was consistent, credible, and unrefuted. None of the defendants' witnesses observed the shooting, and the pleaded versions of commotion or unlawful activity by the plaintiff were unsupported by evidence. The defence of necessity failed as there was no real or imminent threat justifying the use of force, and the shooting occurred at close range in breach of safety protocols. The plaintiff was not contributorily negligent, as he was lawfully present and did not partake in any unlawful activity. Both defendants owed a…
Source excerpt
City of Cape Town v Khaya Projects (Pty) Ltd and Others (21166/12) [2014] ZAWCHC 167; 2015 (1) SA 421 (WCC); [2015] 1 All SA 81 (WCC) (11 November 2014)
The court held that Section 26(1) of the Constitution imposes the obligation to provide adequate housing on the state, not on private contractors. The applicant did not have a direct contractual relationship with the first respondent, and there was no evidence of a principal-agent relationship that would confer locus standi to intervene in the arbitration. The relief sought was academic, as the dispute over defective work was subject to ongoing arbitration between first and second respondents, and the applicant could not claim constitutional obligations that were neither expressly nor implied…
Source excerpt
Voor-Groenberg Nursery CC and Another v Colors Fruit South Africa (Pty) Ltd (A21/12) [2012] ZAWCHC 157 (23 August 2012)
The court found that Colors Fruit South Africa (Pty) Ltd did not discharge the onus of proving that ownership of the plant material had been transferred to it by AMC or Sheehan Genetics. The absence of a reservation of ownership clause in the sub-licence agreement did not, in itself, indicate an intention to transfer ownership. Neither the head licence nor the sub-licence dealt with the ownership of the physical plant material, and there was no evidence that Sheehan Genetics or AMC intended to transfer ownership to Colors. Industry norms, supported by expert evidence, indicate that ownership…
Source excerpt
Fishof 1207 CC v Rapiddough Properties 459 CC (8763/07) [2010] ZAWCHC 534 (8 November 2010)
The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to commission, VAT, interest, and costs after the defendant sold properties during an exclusive mandate.
Pax Oil Verkope CC v Harringtons Ingelyf and Another (A220/2005) [2006] ZAFSHC 28 (21 September 2006)
The court held that the first respondent had to pay the sale proceeds to the appellant and that drawing a cheque did not amount to payment.
Explore more
