Erf 23 Magaliesig CC v Firstrand Bank Limited and Another (39085/2016) [2022] ZAGPPHC 303 (29 April 2022)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
39085/2016
Judge
Ndlokovane
The court held that Uniform Rule 46A does not apply retrospectively to an execution order granted before its commencement, and dismissed the application.
Public Protector v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (2107/2020) [2020] ZAWCHC 117; 2020 (12) BCLR 1491 (WCC); [2020] 4 All SA 776 (WCC) (9 October 2020)
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Case number
2107/2020
Judges
VC Saldanha, ET Steyn, Ml Samela
The court held that the applicant failed to meet the requirements for interim interdictory relief. The applicant did not establish a prima facie right to halt the impeachment process, nor did she demonstrate irreparable harm, as she herself conceded that her removal was unlikely. The balance of convenience favoured the National Assembly, which is constitutionally mandated to proceed with oversight and accountability processes under Section 194. The allegations of mala fides and bias were unsubstantiated, and sufficient mechanisms exist within parliamentary rules and the Ethics Code to address…
Municipal Employees' Pension Fund and Another v Mudau (A540/2017) [2020] ZAGPPHC 538 (22 June 2020)
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Case number
A540/2017
Judges
Kubushi, Avvakoumides, Leathern
Full court appeal about a pension fund rule amendment and whether the Adjudicator could apply it retrospectively to reduce a member’s withdrawal benefit.
Raumix Aggregates (Pty) Ltd v Richter Sand CC and Another; Steeledale (Pty) Ltd v Gorrie; Firstrand Bank Limited t/a Wesbank v Sondamase; SA Taxi Impact Fund (RF) (Pty) Ltd v Tau; Masango Attorneys v Transport and Allied Workers Union of South Africa and Another; Hartless (Pty) Ltd v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Schneider; Nedbank v Chibuye and Others; Absa Bank Limited v Mayer Familie Trust and Others (2019/8153; 2019/6412; 2017/14846X; 2019/12142; 2019/10245; 2019/7918; 2019/14870; 2018/37011) [2019] ZAGPJHC 386; 2020 (1) SA 623 (GJ…
The Full Court held that the amended Rule 32 of the Uniform Rules of Court does not apply retrospectively to pending summary judgment applications initiated before 1 July 2019. The Court found that the right to have a summary judgment application heard under the old Rule is substantive, and retrospective application would extinguish this right and render pending applications nugatory. The Rule itself contains no transitional provisions or indication of retrospective intent. The Interpretation Act supports the principle that amendments do not affect pending proceedings unless expressly stated.…
Raumix Aggregates (Pty) Ltd v Richter Sand CC and Another; Steeledale (Pty) Ltd v Gorrie; Firstrand Bank Limited t/a WESBANK v Sondamase; SA Taxi Impact Fund (RF) (Pty) Ltd v Tau; Masango Attorneys v Transport and Allied Workers Union of South Africa and Another; Hartless (Pty) Ltd v City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality; Standard Bank of South Africa Limited v Schneider; Nedbank v Chibuye and Others; Absa Bank Limited v Mayer Family Trust and Others (2019/8153, 2019/6412, 2017/14846X, 2019/12142, 2019/14229, 2019/10245, 2019/7918, 2019/14870, 2018/37011) [2019] ZAGPPHC 500 (4 Octobe…
The Full Court held that the amended Rule 32 of the Uniform Rules of Court does not apply retrospectively to pending summary judgment applications initiated before 1 July 2019. The absence of transitional provisions and the substantive right of applicants to have their applications heard under the old Rule indicate that the drafters did not intend retrospective application. Applying the new Rule to pending matters would extinguish existing rights and render prior steps abortive, contrary to principles of fairness, legal certainty, and access to courts. The Interpretation Act supports this con…
The High Court held that amended Rule 32 of the Uniform Rules does not apply retrospectively to summary judgment applications filed before 1 July 2019.
Firstrand Bank Limited v Shabangu and Others; Mahomed v Road Accident Fund and Others (2018/43336; 284/2019) [2019] ZAGPJHC 267; 2020 (1) SA 155 (GJ) (16 August 2019)
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Case number
2018/43336; 284/2019
Judge
Grant
The court held that the amended rule 32, which requires summary judgment applications to be brought only after delivery of a plea, is procedural in nature and does not impair any substantive rights or obligations of the parties. The Interpretation Act 33 of 1957 provides that amendments to laws or rules, as opposed to repeals, take effect from the date of operation and apply to all matters adjudicated thereafter. The common law principle that procedural amendments apply retrospectively unless substantive rights are affected was affirmed. The court found that the new rule enhances fairness and…
Makwela v University of Limpopo and Another (4384/2017) [2018] ZALMPPHC 2 (6 February 2018)
Court
Limpopo High Court, Polokwane
Case number
4384/2017
Judge
M.G Phatudi
The High Court set aside the University of Limpopo’s refusal to confer a BA (Communication Studies) on the applicant, holding the refusal irrational and retrospectively unfair.
