Sign in
South Africa Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

South Africa Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
3 court collections
Last checked

South Africa decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Family And Children [2022] ZAGPPHC 864

T.A.P v A.C.P (20638/2013)

T.A.P v A.C.P (20638/2013) [2022] ZAGPPHC 864 (8 September 2022)

The High Court found the respondent in contempt for failing to comply with a divorce settlement order on maintenance and school-fee payments, and ordered payment of the outstanding amount.

  • Contempt Of Court
  • Maintenance Enforcement
  • Variation Of Settlement Agreement
  • Reasonableness Of Expenses
  • Contempt-of-court
  • Maintenance-enforcement
Read case analysis
Family And Children [2011] ZAWCHC 68

Lowe v Lowe (26004/2009)

Lowe v Lowe (26004/2009) [2011] ZAWCHC 68 (10 March 2011)

The court found that the obligations under the consent paper, including maintenance and related expenses, were sufficiently certain and ascertainable to be enforced by writ of execution. The applicant's argument that the order was ad factum praestandum and thus not enforceable by writ was rejected, with reference to established case law. The applicant failed to provide evidence that the expenses claimed were unreasonable or not incurred, despite having access to relevant documentation and the opportunity to present countervailing medical reports. The Magistrates Court order did not retrospect…

  • Maintenance Enforcement
  • Writ Of Execution
  • Consent Paper
  • Reasonableness Of Expenses
  • Arrear Maintenance
Read case analysis
Civil Procedure [2006] ZANCHC 23

Adams N.O v Road Accident Fund (1406/04)

Adams N.O v Road Accident Fund (1406/04) [2006] ZANCHC 23 (21 April 2006)

The court found that the defendant's offer to settle the merits and pay costs was made at a very late stage, immediately before a long weekend, and without reasonable arrangements to ensure the plaintiff's attorneys received notice. The offer did not specify a cut-off date for costs, and the plaintiff's subsequent expenses were unavoidable and reasonable under the circumstances. The defendant assumed the risk of late communication and failed to take adequate steps to notify the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to costs up to and including 18 April 2006, the date of trial.

  • Costs Award
  • Settlement Offer
  • Motor Vehicle Accident
  • Reasonableness Of Expenses
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

South Africa decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.