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
Ross and Another v Nedbank Limited (Leave to Appeal) (10029/2020) [2025] ZAGPJHC 623 (20 June 2025)
The High Court dismissed the Ross applicants’ leave-to-appeal and condonation applications, finding no reasonable apprehension of bias and no reasonable prospects of success.
Van Den Berg v Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa and Others (1955/2016) [2024] ZAFSHC 368 (8 November 2024)
The High Court recused the presiding judge in a recusal application, finding that prior remarks could create a reasonable perception of bias.
Odumegwu v Regional Court Magistrate Booysens (2023/075664) [2024] ZAGPJHC 1062 (22 October 2024)
The court held that the review application was premature as no exceptional circumstances existed to justify intervention before the conclusion of the criminal trial. The applicant was out on bail, and the trial was well advanced. The alleged bias and refusal to recuse could be addressed on appeal if the applicant was convicted. The court emphasized that immediate review of recusal refusals in ongoing criminal proceedings would disrupt the administration of justice and potentially overwhelm the courts. The application was dismissed solely on the ground of prematurity, with no determination on…
Source excerpt
Singh v Body Corporate of St Tropez (386/2023) [2024] ZASCA 142 (21 October 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal set aside a provisional sequestration order after finding the presiding judge should have recused herself for apparent conflict of interest.
Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd t/a Essential Foods v Shear N.O. (JA21/22) [2024] ZALAC 46; (2025) 46 ILJ 344 (LAC) (18 October 2024)
The Labour Appeal Court held that the arbitrator did not commit misconduct or a gross irregularity in the conduct of the proceedings. The arbitrator was not biased and did not deprive the appellant of a fair hearing. The appellant conceded that its evidence was hearsay but failed to lay the necessary foundation or apply for its admission in terms of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act. The arbitrator was under no obligation to admit hearsay evidence without such an application. The employees' evidence was uncontroverted and reasonably probable, and the arbitrator's interventions did not amount…
Source excerpt
Soares v Geber and Another (2024-087263) [2024] ZAGPPHC 798; 2025 (1) SACR 493 (GP) (16 August 2024)
The High Court granted an urgent interim interdict staying Germiston harassment proceedings pending review of a magistrate’s refusal to recuse.
Mokgomole v Sekwela (REV76/2024) [2024] ZALMPPHC 133 (18 July 2024)
High Court review of a magistrate’s recusal in a dog-bite damages case; the court held the apprehension of bias was unreasonable and set the recusal aside.
Electoral Commission of South Africa v Umkhonto Wesizwe Political Party and Others (CCT 97/24) [2024] ZACC 6; 2024 (7) BCLR 869 (CC) (20 May 2024)
Section 47(1)(e) of the Constitution applies to anyone convicted and sentenced to more than 12 months' imprisonment, regardless of whether the conviction and sentence are appealable. The proviso in section 47(1)(e) is a timing mechanism, suspending the disqualification only until all appeals are exhausted or the time for appeal has expired. Where the Constitutional Court acts as a court of first and last instance, its decisions are final and immune from appeal, and the disqualification applies immediately. Remission of sentence by the President does not alter the original sentence imposed by…
Source excerpt
Maritz v S (81/2023) [2024] ZASCA 72; 2024 (2) SACR 412 (SCA) (8 May 2024)
The court held that the appellant failed to establish, on objective facts, a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the presiding judge. Each ground advanced—revocation of bail, alleged activism, request for reports, and communication with another judge—was individually scrutinised and found to be without merit. The revocation of bail, even if erroneous, was subject to appeal and did not indicate bias. The judge's association with a judicial organisation and possession of a symbolic item did not establish partiality. The alleged request for a victim impact report was not substantiated…
Source excerpt
SAP SE v Systems Applications Consultants (Pty) Ltd t/a Securinfo and Another (376/2022) [2024] ZASCA 26; [2024] 2 All SA 639 (SCA); 2024 (5) SA 514 (SCA) (20 March 2024)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's conduct, including misconceiving the evidence, preventing proper cross-examination, and leaving the hearing while instructing that proceedings continue in his absence, created a reasonable apprehension of bias. The judge's belated and improbable explanation for his departure further exacerbated this perception. The cumulative effect of these actions demonstrated that the judge had closed his mind to the evidence and submissions of counsel, undermining the fairness of the trial. As a result, the proceedings before the judge were vitiated…
Source excerpt
Explore more
