Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
South Africa decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Johannes Frederick Gouws N O and Others v Johannes Petrus Erasmus Swarts N O (1250/23) [2025] ZASCA 48 (25 April 2025)
The Supreme Court of Appeal held that no binding sale agreement was concluded at the AGM because the parties lacked consensus on price and tax terms.
Buztrade 102 CC v Chetty and Others (14501/23P) [2025] ZAKZPHC 9 (31 January 2025)
The court set aside an old interdict over immovable property and ordered transfer to the applicant, rejecting objections based on misjoinder, disputes of fact, and occupational rent.
Raftelis N.O and Others v Afropulse 477 (Pty) Limited and Others (D10021/2018) [2023] ZAKZDHC 70 (17 February 2023)
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to plead any substantive basis for personal liability of the second and third defendants as directors. The Companies Act 71 of 2008 establishes that directors are not personally liable for company debts except in narrowly defined circumstances, none of which were properly alleged or substantiated in the plaintiffs' Particulars of Claim. Mere allegations of misrepresentation or the risk of an 'empty' judgment do not justify joinder of directors in their personal capacities. The court aligned itself with the interpretation that Section 218(2) of the Ac…
Source excerpt
Knoop N.O. and Others v Khumalo and Others (6174/2021P) [2023] ZAKZPHC 12 (3 February 2023)
The High Court granted eviction after finding the purchase agreement had been validly cancelled for non-compliance and the respondents had no lawful right to remain.
68 Melville Road Properties (PTY) Ltd v Agile Capital Holdings (PTY) Ltd and Others (27208/2020;27214/2020;27204/2020;27213/2020;27205/2020;27210/2020;27209/2020;27215/2020;3024/2021) [2022] ZAGPJHC 477 (21 July 2022)
High Court granted leave to appeal in consolidated contract disputes about the calculation of “Total Base Development Cost” under sale agreements.
68 Melville Road Properties (Pty) Ltd v Agile Capital Holdings (Pty) Ltd and Others (27208/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 354 (23 May 2022)
The court found that the applicant was entitled to judgment for the adjusted purchase price under the sale agreements. The determination of the Total Base Development Cost by DHP Quantity Surveyors was held to be valid, as the identity of the surveyor was not material and the applicant had discretion to nominate the surveyor. The respondents' defences regarding authority, cost calculation, and disputes of fact were rejected as lacking merit. The court held that no real, genuine, or bona fide disputes of fact existed, and that the respondents' complaints regarding rolled-up interest and cost r…
Source excerpt
Eagle Valley Properties 250 CC v Fourie N.O. and Another (6220/2011) [2022] ZAGPJHC 239 (19 April 2022)
The High Court dismissed a claim for refund of R550,000 paid toward transfer of property, finding no cause of action against the respondents and non-joinder of the City fatal.
Destinar Limited v NTS Shipping PTE Limited and Others (AC07/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 26 (28 April 2020)
The court held that Destinar lacked locus standi to challenge arrest of the vessel Ekarma and dismissed the application with costs.
MMTNB General Trading (Pty) Ltd v Evaton Fuels CC t/a BP Evaton North and Others (72636/2015) [2016] ZAGPPHC 802 (9 September 2016)
The applicant failed to plead and prove the existence of a valid and enforceable contract for the purchase of the business with discernible essential terms. The operative agreement (FA3) was lawfully cancelled by the first respondent following non-payment of the purchase price after a demand. The cancellation of the sale agreement rendered all subsequent agreements and relief sought by the applicant ineffective, as they were dependent on the continued existence of the sale agreement. The withdrawal of the conditional appointment by the third respondent and the withdrawal of funding by the fou…
Source excerpt
Brugsmans and Another v Moutzouris (A757/2007) [2010] ZAGPPHC 614 (24 May 2010)
The court found that the respondents' defence of rectification was properly raised and that there was a genuine dispute of fact regarding whether the parties intended the respondents to be personally liable for the R750 000 or whether the agreement merely provided security for Express Model Trading 481 (Pty) Ltd's liability. The correspondence and affidavits did not resolve this dispute. Applying the Plascon Evans rule, the court held that the matter could not be decided on the papers and should be referred to trial. The appeal was allowed, the order of the court a quo was set aside, and the…
Source excerpt
Explore more
