Esheria South Africa Case Law
Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
4 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter South Africa case law

Results update automatically as you type.

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative Law [2021] ZANCHC 69

Kamiesberg Local Municipality and Another v Koingnaas Belasting Betalersvereniging and Another (2609/2021)

Kamiesberg Local Municipality and Another v Koingnaas Belasting Betalersvereniging and Another (2609/2021) [2021] ZANCHC 69 (31 December 2021)

Court
Northern Cape High Court, Kimberley
Case number
2609/2021
Judge
Mamosebo

The court found that the respondents unlawfully interfered with municipal infrastructure and services without proper authority or compliance with procurement regulations. Their conduct, including roadworks and threats to take control of water, sewage, and refuse systems, was not sanctioned by the municipal council and posed risks of wasteful and irregular expenditure. The applicants demonstrated a prima facie right to administer municipal services, a reasonable apprehension of irreparable harm, and that the balance of convenience favoured granting interim relief. The respondents' technical ob…

Source excerpt

  • Municipal Service Delivery
  • Interim Interdict
  • Rule Nisi
  • Procurement Regulation
  • Urgency
  • Commissioner Of Oaths Compliance
Read case analysis
Labour Law [2021] ZALCJHB 70

Performing Arts Council of Free State v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 82/18)

Performing Arts Council of Free State v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR 82/18) [2021] ZALCJHB 70 (27 May 2021)

Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JR 82/18
Judge
Nkutha-Nkontwana

The Commissioner misconstrued the nature of the arbitration enquiry by reviewing the disciplinary chairperson's findings rather than conducting a hearing de novo, as required by law. The third respondent, as CEO and accounting officer, acted outside his powers by appointing Iceberg Trading without proper authority and in breach of the Public Finance Management Act and Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act. The locality preference was not part of the bid criteria and should have been explicitly stated in the tender documents if intended. The regulatory framework required that any devia…

Source excerpt

  • Unfair Dismissal
  • Procurement Regulation
  • Disciplinary Procedure
  • Public Finance Management Act
  • Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2016] ZAGPPHC 766

Extra Dimensions 14464 CC v Suid-Afrikaanse Postkantoor Limited (5529/16)

Extra Dimensions 14464 CC v Suid-Afrikaanse Postkantoor Limited (5529/16) [2016] ZAGPPHC 766 (18 August 2016)

Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
5529/16
Judge
PA van Niekerk

The court found that the respondent's affidavit resisting summary judgment was vague, sketchy, and failed to disclose a bona fide defence. The respondent did not deny the acceptance of the applicant's tender, the delivery and signing of the draft agreement, or the fact that payments were made for several years. The respondent's reliance on the absence of a signed agreement and alleged non-fulfilment of conditions precedent was speculative and unsupported by facts. The respondent admitted that services may have been rendered, but failed to provide any substantive evidence or documentation to c…

Source excerpt

  • Summary Judgment
  • Contractual Liability
  • Liquidated Claim
  • Procurement Regulation
Read case analysis
Commercial And Corporate [2010] ZAECPEHC 36

Eedendrop (Pty) Ltd v Kouga Municipality (1774/2009)

Eedendrop (Pty) Ltd v Kouga Municipality (1774/2009) [2010] ZAECPEHC 36 (22 June 2010)

Court
Eastern Cape High Court, Port Elizabeth
Case number
1774/2009
Judge
Sangoni

The court found that the agreement between the applicant and the respondent was invalid and of no force and effect due to material non-compliance with statutory requirements. Specifically, the parties failed to comply with the mandatory publication and tender procedures set out in sections 172 and 173 of the Municipal Ordinance, which are designed to ensure transparency and fairness in municipal contracting. The formula for repayment to the applicant via a share of rates was incompatible with section 229(1)(a) of the Constitution, which prohibits the allocation of municipal rates to private p…

Source excerpt

  • Municipal Contracts
  • Invalidity Due To Statutory Noncompliance
  • Rates And Taxes
  • Land Use Planning
  • Procurement Regulation
  • Budget Authorisation
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.