South Africa Case Law

City Tshwana Metropolitan Municipality v Kleinot N.O. and Others (Leave to Appeal) (JR1946/23; JR1946/23)

City Tshwana Metropolitan Municipality v Kleinot N.O. and Others (Leave to Appeal) (JR1946/23; JR1946/23) [2025] ZALCJHB 314 (15 July 2025)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1946/23

Judge

S Snyman

The court found that neither SAMWU nor IMATU advanced proper legal grounds or demonstrated reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The authorities relied upon by the court regarding exemption principles apply equally to the public and private sectors, as the LRA does not distinguish between them. The financial expert's role was not substantiated, and the panellist's findings were based on a misdirection regarding affordability. The respondents failed to provide contradictory financial information, and their arguments regarding collective bargaining and the application of the affordability…

Source excerpt

• Collective Bargaining
• Exemption From Wage Agreement
• Leave To Appeal
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Affordability Test

Mbonambi and Another v eJobourg Retirement Fund and Others (20601/2022)

Mbonambi and Another v eJobourg Retirement Fund and Others (20601/2022) [2025] ZAGPJHC 679 (14 July 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

20601/2022

Judge

GA Fourie

The court found that the Fund had complied with its statutory duty under section 37C of the Pension Funds Act by tracing and considering all potential dependants and nominees. The Fund exercised its discretion lawfully and rationally, taking into account the affidavits and evidence presented. The applicants failed to provide sufficient proof of dependency, and the Fund’s decision to allocate the death benefit solely to Mrs Mbonambi Senior was supported by rational reasons and the deceased’s nomination. The non-joinder of Mrs Mbonambi Senior did not preclude determination of the matter, as her…

Source excerpt

• Pension Funds Act
• Death Benefit Distribution
• Joinder Of Parties
• Review Of Administrative Decision

Kok v Hill N.O and Others (2024/031287)

Kok v Hill N.O and Others (2024/031287) [2025] ZAGPJHC 492 (20 May 2025)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

2024/031287

Judge

Engelbrecht

The High Court dismissed a review aimed at overturning trustees’ repudiation of a property sale after insolvency, finding no procedural irregularity and no vulnerable purchaser status.

• Alienation Of Land Act
• Insolvency Act
• Trustee Discretion
• Vulnerable Purchaser
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Insolvency

South African Legal Practice Council v Mogofe and Another (3639/2023)

South African Legal Practice Council v Mogofe and Another (3639/2023) [2025] ZALMPPHC 64 (26 March 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

3639/2023

Judges

Bresler, Pillay

The High Court dismissed an application to strike an attorney from the roll and a counter-application to review disciplinary findings, citing sparse papers and procedural defects.

• Legal Practitioners Striking Off
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Procedural Compliance
• Legal-practitioner-discipline
• Strike-off

Mashao NO v Government Employees Pension Fund and Others (5382/2022)

Mashao NO v Government Employees Pension Fund and Others (5382/2022) [2023] ZAGPJHC 655 (6 June 2023)

Court

South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg

Case number

5382/2022

Judge

De Vos AJ

The Court found that section 26(1) of the Government Employees Pension Law, 1996 does not require the submission of a Z102 form and that the Fund's refusal to process the claim on this basis is unlawful and irrational. The Fund is obliged to pay benefits within 60 days of them becoming payable and must communicate directly with claimants under Rule 22. The Fund's conduct in stonewalling the applicant and shifting blame to the Department is inconsistent with statutory and constitutional obligations, including the right to social security and fair administrative action. The Court held that the…

Source excerpt

• Fair Administrative Action
• Mandamus
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Social Security Rights
• Statutory Interpretation

Gqokoma v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Education, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and Another (755/2021)

Gqokoma v Member of the Executive Council for the Department of Education, Eastern Cape Provincial Government and Another (755/2021) [2022] ZAECBHC 27 (27 September 2022)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

755/2021

Judge

DA Silva

The court held that the applicant's claim, premised on section 33 of the Constitution, failed because the conduct complained of did not constitute administrative action. The decision not to appoint the applicant was a labour-related issue, affecting only the applicant and not the broader public, and thus fell under the Labour Relations Act. The High Court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter, which should have been brought before the Labour Court. The application was accordingly dismissed with costs.

Source excerpt

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Jurisdiction
• Administrative Action
• Promotion
• Review Of Administrative Decision

Campher N.O. v van Wyk and Others (4480/2021)

Campher N.O. v van Wyk and Others (4480/2021) [2022] ZAFSHC 183 (27 July 2022)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

4480/2021

Judges

ZIETSMAN, REINDERS

The court found that the Master's decision was unclear and did not properly address all relevant issues, including the allocation of both the Gideon Farms and Murphy Farms and the interpretation of the two Wills. The objection was lodged and decided before the liquidation and distribution account had lain open for inspection, contrary to the procedure set out in section 35 of the Administration of Estates Act and the precedent in Götz v The Master. The court held that the matter should be referred back to the Master for proper consideration of the objection and answer thereto after the accoun…

Source excerpt

• Administration Of Estates Act
• Fideicommissum
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Liquidation And Distribution Account

Federation Internationale de Football Association v Sedibe & Another (303/2020)

Federation Internationale de Football Association v Sedibe & Another (303/2020) [2021] ZASCA 113; [2021] 4 All SA 321 (SCA); 2021 BIP 11 (SCA); [2021] HIPR 180 (SCA) (8 September 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Appeal

Case number

303/2020

Judges

Navsa, Mbha, Mocumie, Gorven, Mabindla-Boqwana

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the attachment of FIFA's trademarks in South Africa to found jurisdiction for Sedibe's intended review of a decision taken by FIFA's Ethics Committee in Switzerland was impermissible. The attachment order was not justified because the claim was not one sounding in money nor an action in rem for movables. The review application sought to set aside an administrative decision, not to recover a monetary claim or movable property. The court found that the high court's speculation about possible future monetary claims was unfounded and irrelevant to the basis f…

Source excerpt

• Attachment To Found Jurisdiction
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Trade Marks Act
• Jurisdiction Over Foreign Entities
• Service Of Process
• Superior Courts Act

Mditshwa and Others v Sabona and Others (634/2016)

Mditshwa and Others v Sabona and Others (634/2016) [2020] ZAECMHC 15 (3 March 2020)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Mthatha

Case number

634/2016

Judge

Majiki

The High Court held that the Mtweni Royal Family was the legitimate royal family and dismissed the application with costs.

• Traditional Leadership And Governance Act
• Customary Succession
• Legitimacy Of Royal Family
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Costs Order
• Customary-succession

Distell Limited v Anheuser-Busch Inbev SA-NV and Another (LM211Jan16/OTH172Sep18)

Distell Limited v Anheuser-Busch Inbev SA-NV and Another (LM211Jan16/OTH172Sep18) [2020] ZACT 7 (17 February 2020)

Court

Competition Tribunal

Case number

LM211Jan16/OTH172Sep18

Judges

Yasmin Carrim, Thando Vilakazi, Imraan Valodia

The Tribunal held that “ambient space” in merger conditions meant product storage/display space, not branding space, but treated stadia as outlets for Rule 39 review.

• Merger Conditions
• Exclusive Pouring Rights
• Definition Of Outlet
• Review Of Administrative Decision
• Rule 39 Proceedings
• Merger-conditions