South Africa Case Law

Claassen and Others v Frame (2023/006221)

Claassen and Others v Frame (2023/006221) [2025] ZAGPJHC 705 (21 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/006221

Judge

M V Noko

The application to set aside the subpoena fails because Rule 38 and section 35 of the Superior Courts Act permit the issuance of subpoenas for documents relevant to proceedings, regardless of whether the subpoenaed person is to be called as a witness. The applicant's argument that a trial date must be set before a subpoena is issued is unfounded. The documents requested are relevant to the determination of the accrual in the divorce proceedings, and the applicant did not claim privilege or confidentiality over them. The contention of abuse of process is unsupported, as the subpoena was issued…

Source excerpt

• Subpoena Duces Tecum
• Relevance Of Evidence
• Accrual System
• Abuse Of Process
• Privilege And Confidentiality

Mapisa-Nqakula v S (CC33/2024)

Mapisa-Nqakula v S (CC33/2024) [2025] ZAGPPHC 371 (4 April 2025)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

CC33/2024

Judge

Mosopa

The court held that the applicant failed to establish prima facie facts indicating the relevance of the 'C' section of the police docket to her fair trial rights. The applicant's arguments regarding the sequence of statements, hearsay, and lack of corroboration are matters for trial and do not justify disclosure at this stage. The respondent's refusal to disclose is supported by privilege, confidentiality, and lack of relevance. Regarding the military docket, the court found that ongoing representations and investigations preclude disclosure, but ordered the respondent to provide a progress r…

Source excerpt

• Disclosure Of Evidence
• Investigation Diary
• Section 204 Witness
• Privilege And Confidentiality
• Fair Trial Rights
• Access To Information

Moeketsi v National Director of Public Prosecutions (1590/2023)

Moeketsi v National Director of Public Prosecutions (1590/2023) [2024] ZAFSHC 136 (14 May 2024)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

1590/2023

Judge

JP Daffue

The court found that the respondent, through its discovery affidavit and subsequent conduct, did not claim privilege over any documents in the police docket, including the investigation diary. The respondent's failure to provide the complete docket and lack of opposition to the application entitled the applicant to the relief sought. The court held that the applicant is entitled to inspect the full police docket under rule 35(6), and the respondent must comply within ten days. Costs were awarded against the respondent due to its non-compliance and failure to oppose.

Source excerpt

• Discovery Of Documents
• Rule 35 Uniform Rules
• Privilege And Confidentiality
• Malicious Prosecution

Intercape Ferreira Mainliner (Pty) Ltd v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (1013/2023)

Intercape Ferreira Mainliner (Pty) Ltd v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Another (1013/2023) [2023] ZAECMKHC 100 (22 August 2023)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

1013/2023

Judge

Mtshabe

The High Court dismissed an application to compel production under Rule 35(12) and Rule 30A, finding no reference to a specific document in the answering affidavit.

• Rule 35 Discovery
• Rule 30a Application To Compel
• Affidavit Reference
• Privilege And Confidentiality
• Civil-procedure
• Rule-35-12

Louw v Grobler and Another (3074/2016)

Louw v Grobler and Another (3074/2016) [2021] ZAFSHC 223 (28 September 2021)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

3074/2016

Judge

I van Rhyn

The High Court ordered further discovery under Rule 35(3), finding that the hospital’s objections based on irrelevance and confidentiality were not justified.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Relevance Of Evidence
• Employer Liability
• Privilege And Confidentiality
• Discovery-of-documents
• Civil-procedure

Erasmus N.O v MEC for Health, NC Province (1342/2014)

Erasmus N.O v MEC for Health, NC Province (1342/2014) [2021] ZANCHC 1 (8 January 2021)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

1342/2014

Judge

Van Tonder

The High Court dismissed a Rule 35 discovery application for a confidential settlement agreement, finding the amount paid by a co-defendant was irrelevant and protected by confidentiality.

• Discovery Of Documents
• Confidential Settlement Agreement
• Quantum Of Damages
• Apportionment Of Damages Act
• Joint Wrongdoers
• Privilege And Confidentiality

Burger N.O. and Others v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa (324/18 & 409/2018)

Burger N.O. and Others v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa (324/18 & 409/2018) [2018] ZANCHC 93 (22 November 2018)

Court

Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley

Case number

324/18 & 409/2018

Judge

BM Pakati

The High Court granted condonation and ordered discovery in an urgent banking dispute, holding that Rule 35(14) could apply and that the respondents needed the agreements to plead.

• Discovery In Application Proceedings
• Rule 35 Production
• Condonation
• Privilege And Confidentiality
• Locus Standi
• Extension Of Time

Stevens and Others v Swart NO and Others (2012/38742)

Stevens and Others v Swart NO and Others (2012/38742) [2013] ZAGPJHC 239; 2014 (2) SA 150 (GSJ) (15 August 2013)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2012/38742

Judge

Fisher

The High Court held that Rule 30A could not be used to compel third parties to produce a Rule 53 record. The application was dismissed with costs.

• Rule 53 Review
• Production Of Record
• Privilege And Confidentiality
• Access To Information
• Criminal Investigation
• Costs Order