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
Hyprop Investments Limited v A & M Investments (Pty) Ltd (21528/2021) [2022] ZAWCHC 266 (29 December 2022)
High Court eviction case over a commercial kiosk lease held to be fixed term, not month-to-month. The occupant was ordered to vacate, with condonation granted.
Kellogg Company of South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Barlow World Logistics Africa (Pty) Ltd (2021/58009) [2021] ZAGPJHC 830 (30 December 2021)
Urgent interdict application over termination of logistics services failed because the applicant did not prove an indefinite tacit agreement or a prima facie right.
Acire Property Holdings (Pty) Ltd v Banzi Trade 31 (Pty) Ltd t/a Brick-It (7889/2021) [2021] ZAGPPHC 542 (25 August 2021)
The court dismissed an eviction application, finding the notice to terminate a month-to-month lease was immediate and not a clear, effective termination on reasonable notice.
Philander v Makiet and Others (A61/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 106 (18 September 2020)
Appeal in an eviction matter under PIE. The High Court held the occupiers were unlawful, found eviction just and equitable, and ordered them to vacate by 31 October 2020.
Khumalo v Len Smith Investment Holdings CC (LCC175/2016) [2020] ZALCC 28 (3 March 2020)
The Land Claims Court granted a spoliation order restoring the applicant’s access route to his homestead after gates were locked without reasonable notice.
Khumalo v Len Smith Investment Holdings CC (LCC175/2016) [2020] ZALCC 1 (3 March 2020)
The Land Claims Court granted a spoliation order restoring Khumalo’s access route over the respondent’s farm, finding a precarium and no lawful termination.
Arcelormittal South Africa Limited v Norman and Gary Abkin Dunswart (Pty) Ltd (25729/2018) [2019] ZAGPJHC 330 (23 August 2019)
The High Court granted an eviction after finding the respondent occupied the properties under a tacit lease terminated on reasonable notice.
Berman Brothers Property Holdings (Pty) Ltd v M and Others (23332/17) [2019] ZAWCHC 13; [2019] 2 All SA 685 (WCC) (25 February 2019)
The court found that the respondent occupied the property under a verbal lease with the previous owner, which was not lawfully cancelled prior to the applicant's acquisition. The applicant, as purchaser, was bound by huur gaat voor koop and required to respect the respondent's tenancy. The lease was terminable on reasonable notice, which the applicant provided via the October 2017 notice. The respondent's occupation thereafter became unlawful. In considering eviction under PIE, the court weighed the respondent's circumstances, including her limited means and the interests of her minor childre…
Source excerpt
National Tertiary Education Fund and Another v Nelson Mandela University (PS 74/17) [2017] ZALCPE 34; [2018] 4 BLLR 392 (LC) (19 December 2017)
The court found that the respondent's notice of termination of the Conditions of Service and Benefits Collective Agreement was unreasonably short and did not comply with section 23(4) of the Labour Relations Act. The agreement had been in force for five years, was of indefinite duration, and affected a large number of employees. The respondent's delay in issuing the notice could not justify a short notice period. The applicant had a clear right to the resolution of disputes pending before the CCMA, and termination of the agreement would render those disputes academic and negatively affect mem…
Source excerpt
Annex Distribution (Pty) Ltd and Others v Bank of Baroda (52590/2017) [2017] ZAGPPHC 639 (9 October 2017)
The court found that the applicants had established a prima facie right to reasonable notice before termination of their banking relationships, and that the bank's notices may not have afforded sufficient time under the circumstances. The applicants demonstrated that closure of their accounts would cause irreparable harm to their businesses and employees, while the bank's claim of reputational harm was speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. The balance of convenience favoured the applicants, given the potential impact on thousands of workers and the absence of alternative remedies.…
Source excerpt
Explore more
