South Africa Case Law

J.R. v S (A23/2025)

J.R. v S (A23/2025) [2025] ZAGPJHC 434 (2 May 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A23/2025

Judge

T. Bokako

The court found that the magistrate erred by treating the bail application as a criminal trial, failing to focus on the true purpose of bail, which is to secure the accused's attendance at trial and prevent interference with justice. The record, though incomplete, contained sufficient material for a proper assessment. The appellant had complied with the protection order since 2020, had no history of violating it, and demonstrated no intention to evade trial or threaten the complainant. The urgency of bail and the appellant's financial circumstances were relevant. The magistrate failed to adeq…

Source excerpt

• Bail Application
• Domestic Violence
• Protection Order
• Burden Of Proof
• Interests Of Justice
• Appeal Procedure

T.W.R v Q.E.T (A164/2024)

T.W.R v Q.E.T (A164/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1319 (10 December 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A164/2024

Judges

N G M Mazibuko, E Van Der Schyff

High Court appeal in a domestic violence matter upheld after the magistrates court relied on a struck-out, non-commissioned replying affidavit.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Protection Order
• Affidavit Requirements
• Magistrates Court Rules
• Domestic-violence-act
• Protection-order

G.P v E.P (A 63/2024)

G.P v E.P (A 63/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 1160 (13 November 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A 63/2024

Judges

Holland-Muter, Makhoba

The court found that the appellant failed to present compelling evidence of harassment, psychological or economic abuse as defined by the Domestic Violence Act. The allegations of collusion and threats were speculative and unsupported by factual proof. The financial dispute over inherited funds was not appropriate for resolution under domestic violence proceedings and should be addressed through the Master of the High Court or civil litigation. The appellant's repeated applications for protection orders against the respondent, without substantiated grounds, amounted to an abuse of process. Th…

Source excerpt

• Domestic Violence Act
• Protection Order
• Abuse Of Process
• Estate Dispute

Pillay v S (10802/2024)

Pillay v S (10802/2024) [2024] ZAKZDHC 70; 2025 (2) SACR 110 (KZD) (16 October 2024)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

10802/2024

Judge

Veerasamy AJ

High Court dismissed a bail appeal, holding that a protection order under section 60(12)(b) of the CPA is separate from bail conditions and not appealable under section 65.

• Bail Conditions
• Domestic Violence
• Protection Order
• Statutory Interpretation
• Bail-appeals
• Protection-orders

P.N v Z.N (A2024/033757)

P.N v Z.N (A2024/033757) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1105 (15 October 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

A2024/033757

Judges

Potterill, Mostert

The High Court set aside a magistrate’s dismissal of a final protection order application and referred the matter back for viva voce evidence.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Protection Order
• Viva Voce Evidence
• Dispute Of Fact
• Domestic-violence-act
• Protection-order

K.J.G v J.T.G (A85/2024)

K.J.G v J.T.G (A85/2024) [2024] ZAGPPHC 913 (6 September 2024)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

A85/2024

Judges

Swanepoel, Mooki

Appeal allowed against a final domestic violence protection order, after the High Court found the applicant had not proved entitlement on the evidence.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Protection Order
• Onus Of Proof
• Credibility Assessment
• Interim And Final Orders
• Domestic-violence

D.V.M.T v Minister of Police (2021/51114)

D.V.M.T v Minister of Police (2021/51114) [2024] ZAGPJHC 921 (30 August 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2021/51114

Judge

Raubenheimer

The High Court held that a domestic-violence arrest and detention were unlawful because the officer failed to assess imminent harm and apply the prescribed statutory factors.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Unlawful Arrest
• Police Discretion
• Protection Order
• Damages Liability
• Domestic-violence-act

A.M v S (CA&R130/2023)

A.M v S (CA&R130/2023) [2024] ZAECMKHC 73 (20 June 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Makhanda

Case number

CA&R130/2023

Judges

M.S. Jolwana, I. Bands

The High Court dismissed an appeal against a rape conviction and life sentence, finding the complainant credible, the appellant’s version improbable, and no basis to interfere with sentence.

• Rape
• Minimum Sentencing
• Credibility Of Single Witness
• Consent In Sexual Offences
• Recidivism
• Protection Order

G.D v N.B (HCAA26/2023)

G.D v N.B (HCAA26/2023) [2024] ZALMPPHC 51; 2025 (1) SACR 179 (LP) (20 May 2024)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA26/2023

Judges

T. Deane, M. Naude-Odendaal

The court found that the appellant's marriage to the respondent's sister established a domestic relationship by affinity under the Domestic Violence Act. The appellant's conduct—intimidation, controlling behaviour, psychological abuse, locking farm gates, denying access, and economic abuse—fell squarely within the definitions of domestic violence in the Act. The appellant's denials were not real, genuine, or bona fide and failed to create a material dispute of fact. The Magistrate correctly applied the Plascon-Evans principle, accepting the respondent's detailed allegations and supporting aff…

Source excerpt

• Domestic Violence Act
• Protection Order
• Domestic Relationship Definition
• Psychological Abuse
• Plaintiff Burden Of Proof
• Application To Strike Out

Nel v Larsen N.O. (1217/2020)

Nel v Larsen N.O. (1217/2020) [2024] ZAECQBHC 38 (14 May 2024)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Gqeberha

Case number

1217/2020

Judge

L Ellis

Review of a domestic violence protection order failed where the applicant showed no gross irregularity or bias and the proper remedy lay in appeal.

• Domestic Violence Act
• Review Vs Appeal
• Protection Order
• Gross Irregularity
• Bias
• Costs Award