South Africa Case Law

Tarentaal Centre Investments (Pty) Ltd v Beneficio Developments (15/2025)

Tarentaal Centre Investments (Pty) Ltd v Beneficio Developments (15/2025) [2025] ZASCA 38 (8 April 2025)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

15/2025

Judges

Mokgohloa, Hughes, Smith, Koen, Musi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the applicants failed to discharge the onus of proving that the interest rate charged under the loan agreements was usurious in the sense of extortion, oppression, or fraud. The agreements were bona fide commercial transactions, voluntarily concluded after negotiations between sophisticated parties, and the interest rate was consistent with industry norms for short-term bridging finance. The applicants did not present evidence of exceptional circumstances or reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The court reaffirmed the common law test for usurious t…

Source excerpt

• Usurious Transactions
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Interest Rate Enforcement
• Leave To Appeal Requirements

Van Schalkwyk v Bredenkamp (7650/2024)

Van Schalkwyk v Bredenkamp (7650/2024) [2024] ZAWCHC 380 (19 November 2024)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

7650/2024

Judge

Van den Berg, AJ

The High Court granted condonation, uplifted the bar, and allowed the defendant’s plea and counterclaim to stand filed in a fees dispute.

• Condonation
• Upliftment Of Bar
• Uniform Rule 27
• Attorney And Client Fees
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Upliftment-of-bar

Municipal Employees Pension Fund v Aspara Tech And Projects (Pty) Ltd ta Gadget Solutions and Another (2023/009050)

Municipal Employees Pension Fund v Aspara Tech And Projects (Pty) Ltd ta Gadget Solutions and Another (2023/009050) [2024] ZAGPJHC 530 (31 May 2024)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2023/009050

Judge

Lucas J van Tonder

The court held that Aspara failed to comply with the clear contractual requirement to give notice for renewal of the lease. The lease agreement and its addendum provided an unambiguous procedure for renewal, which Aspara did not follow. The respondent's reliance on public policy, Ubuntu, good faith, and fairness cannot override the express terms of the contract. The jurisprudence since Beadica and Capitec Bank Holdings confirms that courts may not impose agreements or alter clear contractual rights based on abstract principles. The landlord's refusal to renew was within its rights, and the te…

Source excerpt

• Commercial Lease Termination
• Right Of Renewal
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Ubuntu And Good Faith
• Eviction Proceedings

Rodpaul Construction (Pty) Ltd t/a Rods Construction v MEC: KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Department of Public Works (599/2023P)

Rodpaul Construction (Pty) Ltd t/a Rods Construction v MEC: KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Department of Public Works (599/2023P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 84 (18 August 2023)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Case number

599/2023P

Judge

Nicholson AJ

The court held that the adjudicator's determination under the NEC3 contract is binding and enforceable pending arbitration, regardless of the respondent's notification of dissatisfaction or referral to a tribunal. Public policy requires that contracts freely and voluntarily entered into must be honoured, and the respondent's fear of non-repayment if the award is overturned at arbitration does not justify withholding payment. The respondent failed to incorporate any contractual clause allowing for a stay of payment pending arbitration and cannot now rely on public policy to amend the contract.…

Source excerpt

• Adjudication Award Enforcement
• Nec3 Contract
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Sanctity Of Contract
• Piecemeal Litigation
• Set Off

De Lange v Ledimo (A145/2020)

De Lange v Ledimo (A145/2020) [2022] ZAFSHC 191 (1 August 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A145/2020

Judges

Mathebula, Daniso

The court granted condonation for the late filing of the notice of appeal, finding that the delay was due to negligence by the appellant's attorneys and not attributable to the appellant herself. However, the appeal was dismissed on its merits. The evidence established that a valid written agreement existed between the parties regarding the transfer of the property, and the agreement complied with the formalities required by section 2(1) of Act 68 of 1981. The appellant's argument that the agreement was against public policy and therefore void was unsupported by any evidence of a specific mun…

Source excerpt

• Alienation Of Land Act
• Condonation For Late Appeal
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Prescription Of Claims

Fourie v Spruyt Incorporated Attorneys and Others (30607/2020)

Fourie v Spruyt Incorporated Attorneys and Others (30607/2020) [2022] ZAGPPHC 457 (1 July 2022)

Court

North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria

Case number

30607/2020

Judge

Bam

The High Court granted leave to appeal in a dispute about contingency-fee and hourly-fee agreements, finding arguable prospects under section 17 of the Superior Courts Act.

• Contingency Fee Agreements
• Superior Courts Act Section 17
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Legal Practitioners Fees
• Leave-to-appeal
• Contingency-fee-agreements

Transnet SOC Limited v Total South Africa (Pty) Limited and Another (CCT 114/21)

Transnet SOC Limited v Total South Africa (Pty) Limited and Another (CCT 114/21) [2022] ZACC 21; 2023 (3) BCLR 333 (CC) (21 June 2022)

Court

Constitutional Court

Case number

CCT 114/21

Judges

Madlanga, Madondo AJ, Majiedt, Mhlantla, Pillay AJ, Rogers AJ, Theron, Tlaletsi AJ, Tshiqi

The Constitutional Court held that the variation agreement was terminable on three years' notice as provided in clause 5. The phrase 'subject to the arrangement that a full agreement of conveyance for crude oil is being prepared' did not create a suspensive condition for termination, but merely recorded the parties' intention at the time. The Court found that Transnet's notice of termination was valid and the agreement ended in September 2020. On damages, the Court confirmed that a party may claim contractual damages for breach without first cancelling the contract, and that the claims for re…

Source excerpt

• Contract Interpretation
• Termination Of Contract
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Damages For Breach
• Notice Of Termination

Jeremiah v Communicare, a non-profit company and Another (A55/2018)

Jeremiah v Communicare, a non-profit company and Another (A55/2018) [2018] ZAWCHC 158 (21 August 2018)

Court

Western Cape High Court, Cape Town

Case number

A55/2018

Judges

Baartman, Parker

The court found that the first respondent failed to prove that the appellant actually received the required notices, as mandated by clause 29.3 of the lease agreement. The burden of proof was incorrectly shifted to the appellant by the lower court. Furthermore, the court accepted the appellant's version that she made and honoured arrangements to settle her arrears, which should have prevented eviction. The seven-day notice period for remedying breach was held to be unenforceable as it contravened the Consumer Protection Act and public policy, given the indefinite nature of the lease and the v…

Source excerpt

• Eviction Under Pie
• Consumer Protection Act Application
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Burden Of Proof
• Notice Requirements
• Constitutional Values In Contract

Mostert and Others v Nash and Another (604/2017)

Mostert and Others v Nash and Another (604/2017) [2018] ZASCA 62; [2018] 3 All SA 1 (SCA); 2018 (5) SA 409 (SCA) (21 May 2018)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

604/2017

Judges

Ponnan, Wallis, Willis, Swain, Pillay

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the fee agreement between the curator and the Financial Services Board, which provided for remuneration as a percentage of amounts recovered for the Sable Industries Pension Fund, was not in accordance with the norms of the attorneys' profession as required by paragraph 9 of the curatorship order. The evidence established that the conventional norm for attorney remuneration is an hourly rate, not a percentage of recoveries, unless specifically authorized by the court. While such contingency arrangements are not per se unlawful and may be authorized by the…

Source excerpt

• Curatorship Remuneration
• Contingency Fees Act
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Pension Fund Surplus
• Administrative Action Review
• Locus Standi

Four Wheel Drive Accessory Distribution CC v Rattan NO (6916/13)

Four Wheel Drive Accessory Distribution CC v Rattan NO (6916/13) [2017] ZAKZDHC 26; 2018 (3) SA 204 (KZD) (4 July 2017)

Court

Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban

Case number

6916/13

Judge

D Pillay

High Court dismissed a car hire company’s claim for repair costs, finding it lacked locus standi and that the unreadable agreement was unenforceable.

• Consumer Protection Act
• Locus Standi
• Standard Form Contracts
• Plain Language Requirement
• Public Policy In Contracts
• Unconscionable Conduct