South Africa Case Law

Moodley v Crazy Plastics Pty Ltd and Another (A2024/052750)

Moodley v Crazy Plastics Pty Ltd and Another (A2024/052750) [2025] ZAGPJHC 363 (28 March 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2024/052750

Judge

WJ du Plessis

The court found that although the respondents' initial notice of appeal was procedurally defective, the defects were remedied promptly when a case number was allocated and subsequent filings complied with the Practice Directive. The notice was served within the prescribed period, and the applicant was aware of the respondents' intention to prosecute the appeal. The absence of a stamp and case number, later corrected, did not warrant a finding that the appeal had lapsed under Rule 49(7). The court held that procedural rules must be enforced, but technicalities should not unjustly impede the ri…

Source excerpt

• Uniform Rules Of Court
• Appeal Lapsing
• Practice Directives
• Procedural Compliance

South African Legal Practice Council v Mogofe and Another (3639/2023)

South African Legal Practice Council v Mogofe and Another (3639/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 64 (26 March 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

3639/2023

Judges

Bresler, Pillay

The High Court dismissed an application to strike an attorney from the roll and a counter-application to review disciplinary findings, citing sparse papers and procedural defects.

• Legal Practitioners Striking Off
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Procedural Compliance
• Legal-practitioner-discipline
• Strike-off

X and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (52/2023)

X and Another v Commissioner for the South African Revenue Service (52/2023) [2024] ZATC 12 (2 December 2024)

Court

Tax Court

Case number

52/2023

Judge

S G Magardie

The court held that the applicants' Second Objection failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of rule 7(2)(b) of the Tax Administration Act rules. The objections were vague, lacked specificity, and did not address each assessed amount or provide the documents required to substantiate the grounds of objection. The applicants failed to provide SARS with access to the Healthbridge system and did not submit supporting documentation for their objections regarding donations tax, VAT, and unexplained deposits. The court found that SARS was justified in invalidating the objection under rule 7…

Source excerpt

• Tax Administration Act
• Validity Of Objection
• Burden Of Proof
• Donations Tax
• Vat Assessment
• Procedural Compliance

Eagles Pride Hatchery (Pty) Ltd v South African Clothing and Textile Workers Union and Others (2024/092607)

Eagles Pride Hatchery (Pty) Ltd v South African Clothing and Textile Workers Union and Others (2024/092607) [2024] ZALCJHB 531 (18 November 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

2024/092607

Judge

M T M Phehane

The Labour Court dismissed an urgent bid to stop a planned strike over a bonus demand, finding the issue was not covered by the settlement agreement.

• Strike Interdict
• Collective Agreement Interpretation
• Procedural Compliance
• Bonus Demand
• Protected Strike
• Urgent Application

Wabena v Deputy Information Officer for the Department of Health, Eastern Cape (EL 1378/2024)

Wabena v Deputy Information Officer for the Department of Health, Eastern Cape (EL 1378/2024) [2024] ZAECELLC 47 (23 September 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, East London Local Court

Case number

EL 1378/2024

Judge

Hartle

The court removed a PAIA application from the roll after finding the request for medical records was too vague and procedurally non-compliant. No costs order was made.

• Promotion Of Access To Information Act
• Exhaustion Of Internal Remedies
• Procedural Compliance
• Costs Award
• Medical Records Access
• Paia

Pareto (Pty) Ltd and Another v Theron and Another (9804/2023)

Pareto (Pty) Ltd and Another v Theron and Another (9804/2023) [2024] ZAWCHC 249 (6 September 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

9804/2023

Judge

A Montzinger

Summary judgment was refused because the application was out of time and the claim was not shown to be liquidated.

• Summary Judgment
• Liquidated Claim
• Suretyship Liability
• Lease Agreement
• Procedural Compliance
• Summary-judgment

Motaung v Minister of Police (CIP APP RC1/22)

Motaung v Minister of Police (CIP APP RC1/22) [2024] ZANWHC 279 (11 July 2024)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

CIP APP RC1/22

Judges

O.Y Dibetso-Bodibe, J.T Djaje

The High Court struck the appeal off the roll because it was noted late and no condonation application was filed for non-compliance with the rules.

• Condonation
• Magistrates Court Rules
• Late Filing Of Appeal
• Procedural Compliance
• Late-noting-of-appeal
• Magistrates-court-rules

Sekukuni v Legal Practice Council and Another (014453/2022)

Sekukuni v Legal Practice Council and Another (014453/2022) [2024] ZAGPPHC 389 (19 April 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

014453/2022

Judge

Retief

The applicant failed to establish the requisites for final interdictory relief, as she did not prove a clear right or an injury justifying such relief. The demands made in her notice of motion were directed only at the Legal Practice Council, not Ms Jansen, and were not supported by compliance with the prescribed procedures, including payment of the remark fee. The marking of answers written in pencil was in accordance with examination instructions, and no wrongful or defamatory conduct was established. The damages claim was not substantiated, and application proceedings were inappropriate fo…

Source excerpt

• Legal Practitioners Regulation
• Competency Examination
• Final Interdict
• Damages Claim
• Procedural Compliance
• Defamation

Radebe v Road Accident Fund (053998/2023; 074803/2023)

Radebe v Road Accident Fund (053998/2023; 074803/2023) [2024] ZAGPPHC 25 (1 January 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

053998/2023; 074803/2023

Judge

K Strydom

High Court dismissed two RAF declaratory applications, holding that timeous section 24(5) objections are administrative action and that the relief sought was premature.

• Road Accident Fund Act
• Declaratory Relief
• Administrative Action
• Procedural Compliance
• Substantial Compliance
• Road-accident-fund

Mabaso and Others v Goble N.O. and Others (LCC219/2015)

Mabaso and Others v Goble N.O. and Others (LCC219/2015) [2023] ZALCC 3 (16 February 2023)

Court

Land Claims Court

Case number

LCC219/2015

Judge

M T Ncube

The Land Claims Court dismissed a labour tenant land-claim action after finding no valid section 16 application by the plaintiff or her late brother.

• Labour Tenancy
• Land Reform Labour Tenants Act
• Award Of Land
• Section 16 Application
• Procedural Compliance
• Notice To Landowner